According to the US DEA agents involved in the illegal extradition of Bout from Thailand to the US, “Bout is the most dangerous person on the planet”. So that’s not Bin Laden, or Saddam Hussein any more then?
With so many diabolical arch villains all competing with each other to destroy the very fabric of American society in ever more outlandish ways I wonder how anyone in the US is able to get out from under the bed covers each morning.
Moscow denounced Thailand’s extradition of suspected Russian weapons smuggler Viktor Bout to New York on Tuesday, after entrapping him in a US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) 2008 sting operation in Bangkok for allegedly selling surface-to-air missiles and other weapons to a Colombian rebel group the US considers terrorists.
And yet Thailand, who carried out a hurried 180 degree u-turn on a previous decision and agreed to the extradition on those grounds, does not consider the FARC a “terrorist organisation”.
Bout faces trial in New York’s Southern District court for conspiring to kill Americans when he allegedly agreed to smuggle weapons worth millions of dollars to DEA agents posing as Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) guerrillas.
It is my opinion that when two separate countries are asking a third for a foreign national to be extradited, or repatriated (in Russia’s case), then precedence should be given to the country that the individual comes from. It should then be a matter for those two countries to sort out between themselves.
Unless of course that individual has committed a crime in the country currently holding them. In which case they should simply be tried in that country, under its laws. But Bout had not committed a crime in Thailand. In actual fact he has not been shown by the DEA or the US to have committed any crime at all, anywhere. He has simply had allegations made against him.
During court proceedings held in Thailand, Bout denied offering to sell weapons to kill Americans during the DEA’s sting in a Bangkok hotel on March 6, 2008, and said no weapons were ever produced.
Regardless of Bout’s history, this is as close to entrapment as it gets. The DEA agents spent three hours spewing anti-American rhetoric at Bout and noting his reaction. Their account of this conversation they are now using to try him in the media before they even get him into one of their court rooms.
A Grand Jury case of the “United States of America versus Viktor Bout” is titled “Conspiracy to Kill United States Nationals” based on his alleged intent to sell weapons to FARC rebels which in turn could have been used to assassinate US officials working with Colombia’s government.
And with a catchy title like that, and the frantic US media prepping of this case, this is about as far as you can possibly get from the presumption of innocence.
New York prosecutors suspect Bout has illegal bank accounts at Wachovia, the International Bank of Commerce, Deutsche Bank, and the Israel Discount Bank of New York, according to another US indictment. Those accounts were allegedly used by Bout’s company, Samar Airlines, to purchase two Boeing aircraft, despite a US ban against any American company or bank doing business with him.
One wonders, if Bout found it so easy to circumvent US embargoes, then how much effect do similar sanctions actually have on the leadership of “rouge states” like Iran and North Korea.
And let’s not forget that the US were more than happy to employ Bout to deliver weapons and equipment directly to their own troops during the Afghanistan conflict.
In August, Bout said that his alleged aliases, named in a 2008 indictment signed by DEA special agent Robert Zachariasiewicz and presented to the New York court, mistakenly included the real names of two other people who were not him.
Viktor Bulakin and Vadim Markovich Aminov, cited by the US among Bout’s alleged aliases, “also worked in the sphere of air transportation at the same time as me, but I am not responsible for any of their actions,” Bout said. “These two people will be hugely surprised if they learn that they are me.”
Impressive detective work from the DEA again.
Starting in the 1990s, Bout allegedly sold or delivered weapons to rebels fighting wars in Africa, the Middle East and South America, including to Liberia’s Charles Taylor, Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, Afghanistan’s Taliban and others.
Let’s just be clear here, Bout has allegedly done nothing other than carry out the same kind of shady business deals that the UK and the US routinely transact with their preferred allies. To my knowledge Bout certainly has not allowed nuclear weapons to proliferate. Something the US cannot claim.
He has allowed cluster bombs to be trafficked, allegedly. But then so has the US, while turning a blind eye to their use alongside phosphorous weapons, which resulted in internationally condemned civilian deaths.
Furthermore, the majority of RPG weaponry found in Afghanistan today, which actually does kill allied troops, came from CIA supplies which were handed to none other than Osama Bin Laden in one of the US’s proxy wars against Russia.
A Russian involved in Bout’s trial, who asked not to be identified, said in an interview that Moscow was outraged that the US could grab one of its citizens in a foreign country and drag them to America simply on allegations.
Wouldn’t it be nice if a few other countries, like say the UK, had a similar attitude towards their citizens (whether their crimes be war related, or simple civil infractions) being extradited or extraordinarily rendered to the US.
Bout was never convicted of any crime during his trials in Bangkok, which ruled in August 2009 that he be set free because it was not illegal for foreigners to have a conversation in Thailand about planning a crime elsewhere.
And that is where it should have ended. But it didn’t…
After that first extradition attempt failed, the US added allegations of financial crimes committed in America. That US appeal was successful, resulting in a court decision three months ago that he had to be extradited by November 19 or else set free.
“Given that the defendant was charged with conspiring to kill American citizens and American officers, conspiring to source … anti-aircraft missiles, and acquire weapons for a terrorist group like FARC – these are criminal offenses, not just in the country where he is a plaintiff but also the country receiving the charges,” that Bangkok extradition ruling said in August 2010.
To block that ruling, Bout demanded the court hear the newer US allegations of financial crimes against him – apparently hoping that trial would continue past Friday and result in his eventual freedom. That legal twist meant that Bout had demanded that he be put on trial for financial crimes, despite a recent request by the US to drop those charges because America also feared the case would conflict with their August extradition victory.
Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva meanwhile recently announced he would make the final decision on Bout’s extradition. On August 21, however, the Thai premier had said, “The [Thai] government has been saying all along to the US and Russia that it doesn’t, and it can’t, intervene in the justice process.”
And yet it is clear that the judicial process in Thailand was subverted, at least to some degree, in the end.
Bangkok was peeved in April when Moscow hosted former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who is an international fugitive dodging a two-year jail sentence in Thailand for corruption during his five-year administration.
“Everyone is washing their hands, but he [Thaksin] is a bloody terrorist,” Thai Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya said in April. “There is this act of interference by third countries – how can the Russians allow him there for two days or the Germans before that?”
That was probably Russia’s mistake.
It is irrelevant to me if Bout is guilty of these charges or not. Truth be told, he probably is. But then the US and UK, for example, also ply the same trade as Bout.
The real issue here is that Thailand has, at best, stretched its own laws under pressure from a foreign power; the US. And increasingly in our world we are seeing countries break their own laws, and become complicit in violating international conventions to do the US’s bidding.
This is not a healthy state of affairs. And as ever the US’s view of the world, and how it has to behave in that arena, is perceived as being hypocritical.
One quote that sticks in my mind is the following…
The DEA’s Tom Harrigan says recordings show Bout regarded America as his enemy…
Many believe Bout did not care who his weapons killed. But he did care. Based on recorded conversations Bout said he preferred murdering Americans. When told that the arms would be used to destroy American radar location and kill Americans he indicated that the United States was his enemy and a fight against the United States was also his fight.
Tom should hang out in some of my alcohol fuelled political discussions with friends. His toes would curl. And no doubt I would be on a plane to Gitmo the next day.
If I was a salesman, in a meeting with Microsoft, and Apple came up I would probably wax lyrical about my hatred of all things emanating from Cupertino.
But the next day in a similar meeting with Apple I might say something totally different.
But then a nuance like that, which is as subtle as a blow to the head with a blunt instrument, is probably lost on the likes of Harrigan and his colleagues whilst in their patriotic rapture.
The real problem here is that decisions in law are being tainted, and later justified, all with emotional reactions to hear-say. Where is the evidence? If it is so abundant, and so clear cut, why the entrapment, and why the need to apply pressure to another Sovereign nation, and then hurriedly sneak this guy out under armed guard before due process had been carried out fully, finally and in accordance with the law – and respect for other countries sensibilities?
It is being theorised, and even hinted at by certain people in Thailand, that this extradition has cleared the way for a deal with the US to “extradite” Thaksin Shinawatra from somewhere back to Thailand to face justice.
Firstly, it’s my opinion that this is utter rubbish. I actually think it is simply PR spin to divert the Thai media’s attention towards something else they like to obsess about.
If this rumour is true, then it is a text book example of how “Two wrongs don’t make a Right”.