Summary: As standard fare the FM website provides analysis of current events. Seeking hidden truths (often in vain) and using these incidents to illustrate larger dynamics at work in America. The Raymond Davis affair is rich in lesson for us. Here we see one obvious explanation what’s happening, but ignored by our geopolitical experts and news media. This is the 4th post; links are at the end; see the comments for updates.
To be an American geopolitical expert requires (broadly speaking) a willingness to see the US government’s views, and only the US government’s views. Alternative views can only be false or irrational or evil. Not always, but on important issues. When the government’s views change, then one’s views can change (staying at most slightly ahead of the pack). Crimestop, blackwhite, doublethink, and bellyfeel are keys to career success. Heretics require integrity and personal courage; no matter how skillful they remain on the margins (to name a few examples: Chuck Spinney, Winslow Wheeler, Doug Macgregor, Bernard Finel).
The Raymond Davis affair nicely illustrates this problem. The news media and most geopolitical experts reflexively treat the US government’s (USG) story as gospel, and alternative versions circulating in Pakistan as irrational or propaganda. Pakistan’s government (GOP) appears torn, unable to formulate a coherent story. We can draw some interesting conclusions, working step by step to an explanation (but not THE explanation) of actions taken by the USG and GOP.
Contents
Step #1: The USG as the dog that didn’t bark
Step #2: Why has the GOP not ended this incident?
Step #3: Summary of the key questions
Step #4: Circumstantial evidence
Update — Step #5: Of what significance is Davis’ CIA connection?
Step #6: Conclusions
For more information: other posts about the Raymond Davis
Step #1: The USG as the dog that didn’t bark
The USG says that on 20 January 2010 they sent POG a note stating that Raymond Davis was due full diplomatic immunity by his job and location under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961 (see Wikipedia). In this “background briefing” by the State Department on 21 February a senior administration official said this note had been released to the press. It hadn’t. When Justin Elliott of Salon asked he was told:
State Department spokeswoman Nicole Thompson tells me that the January 2010 diplomatic note regarding Davis will not be made publicly available. “We don’t release diplomatic communications,” she said.
This is important evidence, like the dog that did not bark in the Sherlock Holmes story The Silver Blaze. The USG can release the 2010 diplomatic note giving Davis immunity (redacting the confidential parts). Ending the dispute, giving GOP a way out: declare Davis an evil murderer, deport him — and tell their people they had no other choice under long-standing Treaty obligations. That would probably mute the public anger, or at least reduce it to a dull roar.
Why has the USG not released the note? This is the core mystery. We can only guess, but there is one obvious possibility: perhaps because the USG has lied, again.
- Perhaps there is no such note.
- Perhaps the note does not mention Davis.
- Perhaps it does list him, but only due a low grade of immunity (e.g., listing him as a consular officer).
This seems an obvious possibility, but seldom mentioned by the US news media or our geopolitical experts. Which is odd given the long list of lies by USG officials since WWII.
Step #2: Why has the GOP not ended this incident?
Similarly, the GOP can end this affair by acknowledging that they received the 2010 note (or a later note). Here are two reasons why they might not do so.
(a) Perhaps the GOP (or a powerful element of it) wants the Davis affair to continue. This incident has sparked public opposition to American intervention in Pakistan and created a diplomatic crisis with the USG. Neither of that seems helpful to GOP, but domestic power politics or ideology might trump other considerations.
(b) GOP might want to give Davis immunity, but have not done so because the relevant documents (notes from USG to GOP listing people due diplomatic immunity) show that Davis did not have immunity. If so, why has the GOP not lied — saying these documents did give Davis immunity? Perhaps because someone in GOP has copies of the documents, and will release them should senior GOP officials give (or acknowledge) Davis’ immunity. The documents might be the 2010 note or later correspondence (such as those mentioned in the WaPo and The News). Foreign Minister Shah Mehmoud Qureshi refused to grant Davis diplomatic immunity (on advice of Ministry experts) and was sacked (see articles here, and here for details).
Step #3: Summary of the key questions
As usual, deductive reasoning has only helped us identify the vital things we do not know. Davis role in covert activities plays no obvious role in the maneuverings over his diplomatic immunity (or lack thereof).
- Why has USG not released the note, if it proves Davis innocent?
- Why has GOP not acknowledged that the 2010 note (or a later one)?
We do not have the necessary documents. We do not have explanations for the actions of the USG and GOP.
Step #4: Circumstantial evidence
Lacking direct evidence, we can look to the circumstantial evidence for help. Facts from which deductive logic can produce a conclusion. Never guaranteed, but often suggestive. First, do we have exculpatory evidence supporting the USG version?
- How did the US embassy describe Davis after the incident?
- What type of identification was Davis carrying?
- How did Davis identify himself to the police after the incident?
If these all show Davis as a technical employee at the US embassy, that would be strong evidence that the USG had so designated Davis to the GOP — and he had full immunity. But in fact all three say the opposite, that Davis was support staff at one or more US consulates (if the USG has so designated him, he would have little immunity).
But this provides only weak inculpatory evidence (of his guilt, that he had little or no immunity). The US government might have identified him as having full immunity, but given him a different cover — listing in the directory and ID.
(update) Step#5: Of what significance is Davis’ CIA connection
Davis appears to have been a CIA employee of some sort. Some are given full immunity, some have a non-official cover (NOC) with no immunity. For example, Valerie Plame was a Third Consular officer at the US Embassy in Athens. It’s not clear the relevance of Davis’ real job to the actions of the USG or GOP.
Step #6: Conclusions
We can draw some strong conclusions.
- We do not know the truth of what happened or how USG identified Davis to GOP.
- There are indications that the USG story is false. Treating it as self-evident requires blinders.
But few care about the these details. Not the crowds on the streets of Pakistan care. Nor do most of our geopolitical experts. Nor do most of our journalists. The Pakistani news media have covered this story in detail. As usual with journalists outside the herd-like US media, they provided high-quality and detailed coverage (beyond anything found in the US news media) — and total fiction. This allow many US experts to dismiss their coverage in total, which might otherwise shake their blinders (painful!).
We can mindlessly accept what we are told. That worked in the 20th century, allowing America to become the sole superpower. Helped by the self-immolation of our competitors in WWI and WWII, and the internal collapse of the USSR due (communism fail). The 21st century will offer stronger challenges to us. We will have to do better. We can do better.
For more information: other posts about the Raymond Davis affairs
- The Raymond Davis incident shows that we’re often ignorant because we rely on the US news media. There is a solution., 18 February 2011
- How to lose an ally: updates on the Raymond Davis affair, 20 February 2011
- The core of the dispute with Pakistan about Raymond Davis (let’s understand it before it sparks fires with Pakistan), 25 February 2011