CIA spook slays 2 in pakistan

[Arcade22]

The American who shot dead two men in Lahore, triggering a diplomatic crisis between Pakistan and the US, is a CIA agent who was on assignment at the time.

Raymond Davis has been the subject of widespread speculation since he opened fire with a semi-automatic Glock pistol on the two men who had pulled up in front of his car at a red light on 25 January.

Pakistani authorities charged him with murder, but the Obama administration has insisted he is an "administrative and technical official" attached to its Lahore consulate and has diplomatic immunity.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/20/us-raymond-davis-lahore-cia

Tellingly:

The New York Times had agreed to temporarily withhold information about Mr. Davis’s ties to the agency at the request of the Obama administration, which argued that disclosure of his specific job would put his life at risk. Several foreign news organizations have disclosed some aspects of Mr. Davis's work with the C.I.A.. On Monday, American officials lifted their request to withhold publication, though George Little, a C.I.A. spokesman, declined any further comment.

In other words, the NYT knew about Davis' work for the CIA (and Blackwater) but concealed it because the U.S. Government told it to. Now that The Guardian and other foreign papers reported it, the U.S. Government gave permission to the NYT to report this, so now that they have government license, they do so -- only after it's already been reported by other newspapers which don't take orders from the U.S. Government.

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2011/02/21/nyt/index.html

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

I've been asking for a while what the U.S. can expect to get for its tens of billions in anti-terror aid to Pakistan, and it seems like immunity for this guy is the first thing we're willing to make that aid contingent on.

 

[andyandy]

I've been asking for a while what the U.S. can expect to get for its tens of billions in anti-terror aid to Pakistan, and it seems like immunity for this guy is the first thing we're willing to make that aid contingent on.

Politically that would seem a dreadful idea.....

Imagine the reaction if a Chinese spook shot dead two men in broad daylight in the US and then china demanded they be let free....now imagine there is already a large wellspring of anti Chinese sentiment in America which this incident is going to fuel.

The us playing hardball on this will have a detrimental effect on its involvement in fighting Islamic extremism in the country....

 

[WildCat]

The us playing hardball on this will have a detrimental effect on its involvement in fighting Islamic extremism in the country....

And if the guy really did kill them in self defense throwing him to the wolves will have a detrimental effect on other covert agents.

 

[andyandy]

And if the guy really did kill them in self defense throwing him to the wolves will have a detrimental effect on other covert agents.

Yeah it's a tough one - though if you are a spook and get arrested in a foreign country having killed two men in the street, and whilst carrying what appears to be special ops gear (including guns nightsights, knives, and a shedload of ammo according to reports....), then I think you're pretty much screwed. I always thought governments had a deny all knowledge policy when spies landed themselves in it in such a big way.....

 

[WildCat]

Yeah it's a tough one - though if you are a spook and get arrested in a foreign country having killed two men in the street, and whilst carrying what appears to be special ops gear (including guns nightsights, knives, and a shedload of ammo according to reports....), then I think you're pretty much screwed. I always thought governments had a deny all knowledge policy when spies landed themselves in it in such a big way.....

Usually, they're protected as a member of the diplomatic corp. During the Cold War the US and Soviets were constantly expelling "diplomats" who everyone knew were really CIA or KGB.

This is different, in that in Pakistan a westerner is an easy target for extremists and street criminals alike and we are fighting a covert war there, which the Pakistani government condemns in public but cooperates with (to a certain extent) in private.

 

[Bikewer]

In all the media coverage I've listened to on this, including talks of reparations to the families of the deceased Pakistanis... I have not heard a word addressing the actual facts of the incident. If, as was initially maintained, these two were armed robbers attempting to rob the individual... Good riddance.
It's not like the guy just shot down innocent people on the street.
There's a long history of "diplomats" and "attaches" to various embassies being involved in covert activity; during the Cold War I believe even the cooks and janitors at the Soviet embassy were KGB-types....
Likewise with our own personnel.
When caught doing something naughty, they were either deported or detained long enough to trade for someone their side was holding.

 

[andyandy]

But how often do spies caught doing something naughty are exposed to the full glare of the world's media? The closest recent example I can think off is the litvinyenko murder carried out by (almost certainly) by a Russian spy (now a polician which tells you all you need to know about Russian politics ). That caused a massive national story and there is no way he would have been released to Russia if we had captured him in the act.

And surely you have to appreciate some rule of law? People can't just kill people on the street and not expect a police investigation. Was he was acting in self defence? Was it proportionate? These are pretty important questions and I don't see how they can be circumvented in the full glare of the world's media......

 

[TragicMonkey]

I've been asking for a while what the U.S. can expect to get for its tens of billions in anti-terror aid to Pakistan, and it seems like immunity for this guy is the first thing we're willing to make that aid contingent on.

We could improve efficiency and reduce personnel costs by simply paying Pakistan to kill some of its own citizens from a list we provide. It could be worked out in quite a civilized manner. "If you eliminate all of the parties on List A, you will get 10 billion dollars. For each of the parties on List B, we'll add fifty thousand more. If the party has a star next to it, it's worth bonus points which you can redeem at the end of each financial quarter."

 

[Quad4_72]

The way I imagine it, this guy was driving an Astin Martin through the city when the assailants pulled up in front of his car. The assailants told him to get out of the car at gunpoint, which he politely cooperated and stepped out slowly in a very suave fashion in his all black, custom tailored Armani suit. The assailants yelled at him to relinquish his gun, which he complied by throwing his gun to the curb. They then told him to come with them, which he responded by saying "I'm afraid I can't do that gentlemen." in his calm and collected British accent. The assailants moved forward to restrain him, but at the same time the CIA agent did a round house and kicked the guns out of both of their hands. He then jumped back onto the hood of his car while simultaneously pulling out his spare gun from his ankle holster. He then fired just two shots, right in between the eyes of both gunmen. He then got back to his feet, brushed his suit off and said "Clean yourselves up, you've made a dreadful mess." and then threw his handkerchief at their heads. The CIA Agent James Bond then got back in his car and drove to the local police station, turning himself in as part of his master plan.

In all seriousness though, that is probably EXACTLY how it went down.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

We could improve efficiency and reduce personnel costs by simply paying Pakistan to kill some of its own citizens from a list we provide. It could be worked out in quite a civilized manner. "If you eliminate all of the parties on List A, you will get 10 billion dollars. For each of the parties on List B, we'll add fifty thousand more. If the party has a star next to it, it's worth bonus points which you can redeem at the end of each financial quarter."

I was thinking more on the lines of respect for human rights and not offering safe havens for Taliban and Al Qaeda people working in Afghanistan.

Even so, what you suggest would probably be a better return on our investment than we're getting now. . . except that it's probably illegal.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I was thinking more on the lines of respect for human rights and not offering safe havens for Taliban and Al Qaeda people working in Afghanistan.

Yeah, those things'll happen.

Even so, what you suggest would probably be a better return on our investment than we're getting now. . . except that it's probably illegal.

I never understood the application of the concept of "legality" to dealings between nations. Nations make their own laws for themselves, and deal with each other however they like. There is no authority in existence that can make or enforce laws binding upon nations if the nations choose to ignore them.

 

[Zep]

If you think the gun laws in the USA are lax, take a look in Pakistan. People packing a gun in the street is "normal", often a slung semi-auto. So is using them. The wild, wild, East...

 

[sarge]

Yeah it's a tough one - though if you are a spook and get arrested in a foreign country having killed two men in the street, and whilst carrying what appears to be special ops gear (including guns nightsights, knives, and a shedload of ammo according to reports....), then I think you're pretty much screwed. I always thought governments had a deny all knowledge policy when spies landed themselves in it in such a big way.....

It isn't a tough one at all.

The guy is immune to prosecution in Pakistan. That is a question of fact, and is settled with reasonable certainty. Pakistan extended an entry visa to a guy with a diplomatic passport, and it matters not at all that the passport didn't identify the guy as a spook. If the courts of Pakistan choose to ignore this fact, then it is the responsibility of the Pakistani Goverment to enforce the immunity and deliver the guy to the US for prosecution.

The whole "take your poison pill" approach to outed spies only applies to the non-sanctioned ones. The sanctioned ones get PNGd and returned to their country of origin.

Of course, none of this is an endoursement for what the guy did, or for the practice of providing diplomatic immunity to spies in the first place.

 

[bencg]

It isn't a tough one at all.

The guy is immune to prosecution in Pakistan. That is a question of fact, and is settled with reasonable certainty. Pakistan extended an entry visa to a guy with a diplomatic passport, and it matters not at all that the passport didn't identify the guy as a spook. If the courts of Pakistan choose to ignore this fact, then it is the responsibility of the Pakistani Goverment to enforce the immunity and deliver the guy to the US for prosecution.

The whole "take your poison pill" approach to outed spies only applies to the non-sanctioned ones. The sanctioned ones get PNGd and returned to their country of origin.

Of course, none of this is an endoursement for what the guy did, or for the practice of providing diplomatic immunity to spies in the first place.

I totally agree, but that dosen't mean it will turn out that way.

Pakistanis see the episode as more evidence of imperialistic arrogance. For years the press has been filled with conspiracy-laden speculation about Blackwater – now known as Xe – the American military contractor with a reputation for violent ruthlessness, in their country. Papers have been filled with stories of armed Americans roaming the streets with disdain for the law and innocent life. The US denied the stories. But now Blackwater has been made flesh.

Press coverage zings with unlikely stories about Davis – that he howls in his prison cells when the five-times daily call to prayer rings out; that the CIA plans a "Hollywood-style heist" to spring him; that he is the linchpin of the CIA's drone programme.

...

The Davis debacle is another disaster for the Pakistan government, whose handling has been characterised by bungling and division, and highlights the country's pathological relationship with America. "Our people have a funny way of fighting a fire by pouring oil on it," said one dispirited senior official.

It's telling that he wasn't immediately expelled to the US, that is the usual protocol but in Pakistan there are many factions and its hard for the moderate central government (such as it is) to exercise control quickly.

Interestingly the support car behind him also ran over and killed someone whilst trying to extract him and apparently jettisoned some black ops kit including a blindfold and handcuffs on the way back to the embassy. Not the way to make friends in Islamabad. I guess this shows that the CIA do not liase with the ISI as well, if true I can understand why but it makes it more difficult.

Imagine if a Pakistani agent in the USA (with diplomatic cover) shot and killed 2 americans and a 3rd was run over and killed by his support car. The car then dumps a kidnap kit on its way back to the embassy, and the papers run wild conspiracy theories about Pakistani death squads operating at large in the USA.


US Pressure to realease him is going to be immense, I forsee some face saving deal for the Pakistani government where they get some public concession and he is released to a criminal investigation in the US.

 

[andyandy]

@Sarge

there would be precisely zero chance of this guy being released if the roles were reversed and this was a Pakistani spook caught with guns and a bucket load of ammo after shooting dead two men in the street in New York. None.

So it's a bit hard to take the "but it's the rules" argument too seriously. The us does what it likes with regards to international laws. Kidnap and torture from foreign countries for example. This is very much against "the rules" of law both national and international. A nation not honouring a diplomatic passport issued to a man arrested for a double murder hardly seems shocking by comparison.

As a question, if person x was in the us on a diplomatic passport would there be anything they could do for which you'd support their arrest and conviction? It seems likely that most people would happily revoke diplomatic immunity at some point, a double murder investigation seems sufficient to me.

 

[sarge]

@Sarge

there would be precisely zero chance of this guy being released if the roles were reversed and this was a Pakistani spook caught with guns and a bucket load of ammo after shooting dead two men in the street in New York. None.

The US has often returned suspected criminals with diplomatic immunity to their country of origin. It is the normal order of things, and your speculation that there is "zero" chance of that happening is not supported by track record. The chances are decidly greater than zero, and arguably greater than 50/50.

So it's a bit hard to take the "but it's the rules" argument too seriously. The us does what it likes with regards to international laws. Kidnap and torture from foreign countries for example. This is very much against "the rules" of law both national and international. A nation not honouring a diplomatic passport issued to a man arrested for a double murder hardly seems shocking by comparison.

Strange, I don't remember presenting a tit-for-tat argument dependant on the likely outcome should the roles be reversed. Nor did I intend to let shock or outrage slip into my lone post on this topic.

I merely presented the facts - Pakistan provided this spook with diplomatic immunity at the moment they provided a visa.

As a question, if person x was in the us on a diplomatic passport would there be anything they could do for which you'd support their arrest and conviction? It seems likely that most people would happily revoke diplomatic immunity at some point, a double murder investigation seems sufficient to me.

Persona non grata (Latin, plural: personae non gratae), literally meaning "an unwelcome person", is a legal term used in diplomacy that indicates a proscription against a person entering the country. It is the most serious form of censure which one country can apply to foreign diplomats, who are otherwise protected by diplomatic immunity from arrest and other normal kinds of prosecution..

and

While diplomatic immunity protects mission staff from prosecution for violating civil and criminal laws, depending on rank, under Articles 41 and 42 of the Vienna Convention, they are bound to respect national laws and regulations (amongst other issues). Breaches of these articles can lead to persona non grata being used to 'punish' erring staff. It is also used to expel diplomats suspected of espionage ("activities incompatible with diplomatic status"[1]) or any overt criminal act........

You might as well argue that if the law does not specify a sufficiently stiff penalty for a crime, the courts should be free to impose any punishment they deem appropriate.

 

[sarge]

I totally agree, but that dosen't mean it will turn out that way.

I suspect that it will not turn out that way.

It's telling that he wasn't immediately expelled to the US, that is the usual protocol but in Pakistan there are many factions and its hard for the moderate central government (such as it is) to exercise control quickly.

Interestingly the support car behind him also ran over and killed someone whilst trying to extract him and apparently jettisoned some black ops kit including a blindfold and handcuffs on the way back to the embassy. Not the way to make friends in Islamabad. I guess this shows that the CIA do not liase with the ISI as well, if true I can understand why but it makes it more difficult.

Imagine if a Pakistani agent in the USA (with diplomatic cover) shot and killed 2 americans and a 3rd was run over and killed by his support car. The car then dumps a kidnap kit on its way back to the embassy, and the papers run wild conspiracy theories about Pakistani death squads operating at large in the USA.


US Pressure to realease him is going to be immense, I forsee some face saving deal for the Pakistani government where they get some public concession and he is released to a criminal investigation in the US.

If he is released to the US Goverment, I hope that he faces a legitimate investigation, and if warranted, a trial.

 

[andyandy]

US has often returned suspected criminals with diplomatic immunity to their country of origin. It is the normal order of things, and your speculation that there is "zero" chance of that happening is not supported by track record. The chances are decidly greater than zero, and arguably greater than 50/50.

when has the us returned a murder suspect due to diplomatic immunity? And as I said if the roles were reversed and it became a big media story it is inconceivable that this guy would be released from American custody to Pakistan. Can you imagine the political outrage ? Can you imagine the nationalistic tub thumping? If you reject a zero probability it'd be damn close to zero and nowhere near 50/50.

tit for tat understanding is essential to understanding the likely and expected reaction from Pakistan. That's where the empathy withthe situation comes from

re the rules of law - as I've said before , extrajudicial kidnap by a foreign government, detention without trial and torture are all against plenty of national and international laws - the us is happy to break these at will, it somewhat undermines the "but you signed this bit of paper" argument.

You didn't answer whether there was any crime comitted by a Pakistani spy fir which you would want diplomatic immunity revoked....surely this is an essential question, diplomatic immunity is either irrevokable or it isn't, once it is it's just a matter of degrees.

 

[andyandy]

The only similar example of a death caused by a diplomat on American soil that I can find is a Georgian diplomat who killed somone drink driving in 1997. The outcome (for a much less serious offence than double murder) was that Georgia waived diplomatic immunity and he was charged and convicted of manslaughter. One would imagine there was considerable diplomatic pressure behind the scenes to secure a conviction.