Parries → British Press on Pending Hostage Release 

I just wish the soldiers had apologised a little less frequently. It seems the poisonous English penchant for saying ‘sorry’ has come home to roost, with the price being loss of international face. Not everyone is so post-modern as to treat the apology as something entirely meaningless. It’s civilized to value apologies, and issuing them left right and center erodes a fundamental human value. Nietzsche argued that a major source of man’s worth is that he values promises, and that sounds right to me. Apologies are the inverse of promises. Apologising for something you did not do when you are no longer under duress is weird.

Anyway. I feel a cad for writing that; who knows what trauma the hostages underwent, fearing having their heads sawed off perhaps.

I’m surprised the Iranians released them. I was all set to write today about how Britain’s next step must surely be to return to the EU and demand more seriously that the Iranian hostage crisis must become a European issue, that the EU must match any position vis-a-vis Iran that Britain takes, that this would be an ideal issue on which to demonstrate European unity.

But there it was, the announcement today by Ahmedinejad, and an amazingly brazen and I’d say ultimately successful attempt to make the regime appear benevolent. Okay, obviously it was bizarre and creepy, but even I felt all cheery as he chatted with the hostages, and this is a man who seeks to convert my hometown into radioactive dandruff. He announced the release a full hour into a rambling speech, used rhetoric such as the release being “a gift to the British people”, inflicted more humiliation on the soldiers by meeting and greeting with them. Interestingly, the BBC’s headline was ‘Iranians release British sailors’ although they’re still in Iran; I would add the short word “to” in there. As the story itself says, “The British embassy in Tehran said it had now seen the sailors for the first time, and it was arranging the details of their travel home. But it was not clear where they were spending the night.” In contrast, both the American and Israeli press are a little more circumspect. “Iran to Release 15 Britons Held Since March 23” is how The New York Times puts it. Meanwhile the Jerusalem Post has an interesting spin on the story, moving on already from the initial release and to the PM’s reaction: “Blair ‘relieved’ over Iran’s release of sailors and marines”.

Other UK headlines also jump the gun:

• The Telegraph: Extraordinary scenes as Iran frees sailors
• The Times: Iran releases 15 as ‘gift’ to Britain

Those are the right-of-center papers (well, what passes for right-of-center in Britain today). Strangely, it’s the loony lefties who display a bit more caution about the Iranian regime:

• The Independent: Iran announces release of British sailors
• The Guardian: Iran to release British sailors tomorrow

The final paragraph of the BBC story, the story of record really because Britain no longer has a newspaper of record, is a quote from an uncle of one of the hostages: “Whoever has been in the right or wrong, the whole thing has been a political mess, so let’s just get them home.” Observe the deadly moral equivalence between the aggressor and the victim: Stockholm Syndrome at a societal, perhaps civilizational level.

But not at the leadership level. Tony Blair’s reaction was, as it’s been throughout the crisis, pitch perfect. Here he was polite to the Iranian people and frosty about their government. Blair may be ridiculed but he’ll be greatly missed if and when replaced before he loses an election. I doubt any other country, even the USA, could have gotten its hostages back while offering what appears to be so little. True, Blair was not under duress, and he is a politician and a statesman, but there is such a terrible gulf between his statements and those gushy fawning ones by the prisoners themselves. It was a very poor show indeed; they were not being held by terrorists with no address, but by a government. If they had refused to say what the Iranians wanted them to say, what’s the worst that could happen to them? Poor fellows, they’ll be traumatized for years—not for what happened to them, but for what didn’t happen to them. Even after their release, they were still fawningly polite.

But the major point of course is that it’s not over yet. It’s not clear whether the British Embassy has custody of them yet. I’m wagering there’ll be more strings attached overnight. And if Britain balks there will be an attempt to make the British government appear to be the spoiler. It’ll be a test of British will, and whether Blair will stand up to that. I think he’ll give up what’s required to see an end to the situation, but I hope he won’t, and be brave and show them up for any last-minute grandstanding.

Meanwhile, what effect, if any, does this have on the issues and larger situation? Very little I suspect. I think ultimately the Islamic revolutionary republic lost here. It did flex a bit of muscle, duly noted, but my prediction is only two changes: British forces will toughen up and change their rules of engagement—from now on they’ll fire back—and Americans forces will make very sure that any Iranians they capture were directly and evidently plotting nasty mischief.

Update: The BBC has renamed its story to ‘British sailors set to come home’ and makes more of a mention that they’re not quite safe yet: “The Foreign Office confirmed on Wednesday night that the crew were in good health, but were ‘still with the Iranians.’”