Arrogant Americans are getting their comeuppance

Post Reply New Topic

Agreed. Messing with security is unacceptable.

Oh, for sure, I was just responding to the ridiculous thread title, not the actual incident.

The thread title is certainly not the best it could have been

Still, what interests me is not so much the specifics of the incident, but its consequences in international politics. I can't help but wonder, what would people's reaction be if a US woman was cavity searched in India.

Stip search =/= cavity search.

The OP mentions a cavity search. Fnord's post mentions a "full search", which leaves that possibility open. Reading the article the OP linked to, there is no mention of a cavity search though. beneficii, did you read from another source that she was cavity searched?

It does change the general idea I had of it. Nevertheless, as I have stated enough, what I'm really curious about is the diplomatic repercussions.

There will be next to none. The media in India is prone to fits of outrage, often with heavily nationalistic emphasis. The US is not the first nor will it be the last country to receive such a blast. When they happen and they happen quite frequently it usually just displays a raw sense of insecurity within the Indian political class and media. The US policy makers will have already worked out that the worst is already past, sort reassurance from the Indian Government and will make gestures to make sure they do not look indifferent. Its pretty much what everyone else has done and so far the main result of these fits has been the fact that they always rebound negatively on international perceptions of India. It is interesting to me that some people have jumped on the bandwagon of condemnation, forgetting that the US is simply enforcing the same rules that they apply to themselves. The reason why this happens to American officials so much less often than it does to others is that they have a much more professionalized foreign service. India does not. Although perhaps the worst I have seen is from Israeli officials (because they really ought to do better) who have an awful track record of shooting their mouths off or getting into trouble.

I am not in love with her, and I do not condone her actions in the slightest. My issue is that she was treated with much less dignity and respect than any representative of a foreign government has been or should be treated. In a time where the US is rapidly losing the support of allies and angering nations who already distrust and/or dislike us, these actions will only accelerate the world abondoning their support of our country.

As for violating our laws, the same could be said for many of our diplomats abroad. Prostitution, drug use, abuse of power, bribery, and blackmail have all been documented behaviors of our representatives in other nations. They are either sent from the country never to return or their crimes are ignored. This whole situation just serves to alienate and isolate the US from the rest of the world even further.

And as for concern for the girl being exploited, have you ever bought an Apple product? Have you ever bought a T-shirt? Have you ever shopped at Wal-Mart? How about Nike, GAP, Old Navy, "American" Eagle Outfitters, Home Depot, Lowe's. Do you own a computer, laptop, smart phone, TV, gaming console? If so then you are likely supporting the exploitation of workers who earn less in a day than that woman was being paid in an hour. I'm not saying that that it is ok, just that you may be focusing on the wrong thing.

And the whole diplomatic immunity thing has been twisted by both sides. Yes, technically the US authorities can legally do all of these things to her (as a consul), but technically a homosexual diplomat in Saudi Arabia could be arrested and executed.

And as to the Indian government removing security barriers, I do believe that is going too far. But it is well within their legal abilities. The security provided by India to our embassy is a courtesy (not a requirement), so I can understand why they feel justified in doing so.

This will soon blow over, with the two governments reaching a "mutual understanding" to ignore the law-breaking activities of each others' diplomats and consuls ... such is politics ...

That seems the most likely outcome, but it will probably still be used as ammo against the US government by many other nations for the forseeable future.

Indian diplomats have an expectation of the sort of reception they will receive that is beyond other people generally get in the same position. There is a perception in India, probably left over from the colonial times, that being in the big league means diplomatic privileges. There is a diplomatic line in most major airports but even that was not good enough for this chap (http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/ ... 17256.html), who cancelled his entire trip because airport security was seen as an insult.



The same is also true in India. Although you will find that the US government is pretty good at making sure that homosexual diplomats are in roles with full immunity. However, given the changes recently in India this is not the case and one particularly nasty politician in India recommended that the partners of the diplomats should be rounded up (http://www.buzzfeed.com/lesterfeder/arr ... s-indias-e). Consuls are not wholly about diplomatic representations, they are often about cultural engagement. I have friends in my local community who take turns being the Spanish consul to my home city, often they are not even remotely trained in diplomacy.



Umm it is not a courtesy, they are responsible for protecting diplomatic staff and facilities under the Vienna Convention.

They are responsible for their safety outside of the embassy, but nowhere does it say that there must be barriers or security forces.

And I will reiterate: I do think that they are pushing things a little too far, but I can understand their point of view.



http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/150546.pdf

The barriers would be a provision within their MOU between the United States and India. ALL United States facilities are required to have those facilities in order to function under USC 4865. Under such an MOU the security standards are a requirement, acknowledged as a such by the receiving party and they cannot be terminated without proper notice (usually 90 days). Traditionally speaking the US will offer to pay for some or all of the installation. The Indian government took a wrecking crew to the bollards.



Visa fraud is not a misdemeanor. And she does remain at liberty, she was search and processed after her arrest which is the standard procedure.