nico
09-07-03, 02:19 PM
Tracks of terror
Aug 28th 2003 | BUENOS AIRES AND TEHRAN
From The Economist print edition
The explosive arrest of an ambassador
Reuters
Uncovering an Iranian connection
IN 1994, a car bomb outside a Jewish welfare centre in Buenos Aires killed 85 people and injured more than 200. The investigation, led by Judge Juan José Galeano, has dragged on for years and achieved little—until now. Last week, Britain acted on an international arrest warrant issued by Mr Galeano, and detained Iran's former ambassador to Argentina, triggering a diplomatic kerfuffle. On August 27th Belgian police briefly detained a second Iranian wanted by Judge Galeano; he was released after claiming diplomatic immunity.
The Argentine intelligence service, with its Israeli and American counterparts, has long accused Hizbullah, the Lebanon-based “Party of God”, of carrying out the bombing with help from the Iranian embassy. The same alliance is also suspected in a similar attack in 1992 on the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires, which killed 29.
Iran's government denies the claims. It has reacted with fury to the arrest of Hadi Soleimanpour, who is studying for a PhD at Durham University. Britain's government, which has tried hard to improve its relations with Iran, insists that the arrest is a purely judicial matter. The British courts will now decide whether there is sufficient evidence to extradite Mr Soleimanpour. But Iran sees the hand of the United States in the affair. Facing pressure to abandon its nuclear ambitions (see article), it wants the matter solved quickly, and has hinted that it may expel the British ambassador
Certainly, the timing of Judge Galeano's request for the arrest is interesting. Argentina's spies were already tapping the Iranian embassy's phones before the 1994 bomb. Yet it was not until March this year that the judge requested the arrest of four Iranian officials (who had all returned home). Having been advised of Mr Soleimanpour's presence in Britain, and having received no co-operation from Iran in his quest for the four, this month the judge added him (and two others) to his list.
Mr Galeano is himself under investigation. He is accused not only of being dilatory, but of destroying evidence (he says he had nowhere to store it). This month an Argentine spy testified that Mr Galeano had paid one of a score of locals accused of involvement in the bombing $400,000 to incriminate police chiefs. Néstor Kirchner, Argentina's new president, has criticised the failure to solve the case. He has opened intelligence files to the courts, and allowed 14 intelligence officers to testify. He has also launched a crusade to clean up Argentina's judiciary, many of whose members are cronies of Carlos Menem, Argentina's president from 1989-99. So a high-profile arrest was useful to Mr Galeano.
Mr Menem is alleged to have taken a $10m bribe from Iran to cover up its involvement. He denies this. The interior minister at the time of the bombing has said that the government did not want to antagonise Iran out of fear of provoking a third attack. Argentina's trade surplus with Iran may also have played a part: Iran this week banned all imports from Argentina, which last year totalled $475m.
Mr Kirchner is said to be considering throwing his weight behind moves by relatives of the victims to remove Judge Galeano from the case. That may happen later this year, when another set of judges is due to complete the formal hearings in the case. They are expected to criticise Mr Galeano's work.
Sooner or later, the investigation in Buenos Aires might shed some light on claims that Iran operates two diplomatic services, one through the foreign ministry and another parallel apparatus, with ties to terrorist outfits and answerable to the regime's hardline clerics. But if so, which one did Mr Soleimanpour work for?
The soured relations btwn Argentina and Iran, once close allies has been time and coming with this attack in 1994. Menem was a corrupt president. He may have had some sympathies with the cause because he is Syrian, and he was a muslim before converting. But the question is should Mr. Galeano be tried even though he has diplomatic immunity?
Aug 28th 2003 | BUENOS AIRES AND TEHRAN
From The Economist print edition
The explosive arrest of an ambassador
Reuters
Uncovering an Iranian connection
IN 1994, a car bomb outside a Jewish welfare centre in Buenos Aires killed 85 people and injured more than 200. The investigation, led by Judge Juan José Galeano, has dragged on for years and achieved little—until now. Last week, Britain acted on an international arrest warrant issued by Mr Galeano, and detained Iran's former ambassador to Argentina, triggering a diplomatic kerfuffle. On August 27th Belgian police briefly detained a second Iranian wanted by Judge Galeano; he was released after claiming diplomatic immunity.
The Argentine intelligence service, with its Israeli and American counterparts, has long accused Hizbullah, the Lebanon-based “Party of God”, of carrying out the bombing with help from the Iranian embassy. The same alliance is also suspected in a similar attack in 1992 on the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires, which killed 29.
Iran's government denies the claims. It has reacted with fury to the arrest of Hadi Soleimanpour, who is studying for a PhD at Durham University. Britain's government, which has tried hard to improve its relations with Iran, insists that the arrest is a purely judicial matter. The British courts will now decide whether there is sufficient evidence to extradite Mr Soleimanpour. But Iran sees the hand of the United States in the affair. Facing pressure to abandon its nuclear ambitions (see article), it wants the matter solved quickly, and has hinted that it may expel the British ambassador
Certainly, the timing of Judge Galeano's request for the arrest is interesting. Argentina's spies were already tapping the Iranian embassy's phones before the 1994 bomb. Yet it was not until March this year that the judge requested the arrest of four Iranian officials (who had all returned home). Having been advised of Mr Soleimanpour's presence in Britain, and having received no co-operation from Iran in his quest for the four, this month the judge added him (and two others) to his list.
Mr Galeano is himself under investigation. He is accused not only of being dilatory, but of destroying evidence (he says he had nowhere to store it). This month an Argentine spy testified that Mr Galeano had paid one of a score of locals accused of involvement in the bombing $400,000 to incriminate police chiefs. Néstor Kirchner, Argentina's new president, has criticised the failure to solve the case. He has opened intelligence files to the courts, and allowed 14 intelligence officers to testify. He has also launched a crusade to clean up Argentina's judiciary, many of whose members are cronies of Carlos Menem, Argentina's president from 1989-99. So a high-profile arrest was useful to Mr Galeano.
Mr Menem is alleged to have taken a $10m bribe from Iran to cover up its involvement. He denies this. The interior minister at the time of the bombing has said that the government did not want to antagonise Iran out of fear of provoking a third attack. Argentina's trade surplus with Iran may also have played a part: Iran this week banned all imports from Argentina, which last year totalled $475m.
Mr Kirchner is said to be considering throwing his weight behind moves by relatives of the victims to remove Judge Galeano from the case. That may happen later this year, when another set of judges is due to complete the formal hearings in the case. They are expected to criticise Mr Galeano's work.
Sooner or later, the investigation in Buenos Aires might shed some light on claims that Iran operates two diplomatic services, one through the foreign ministry and another parallel apparatus, with ties to terrorist outfits and answerable to the regime's hardline clerics. But if so, which one did Mr Soleimanpour work for?
The soured relations btwn Argentina and Iran, once close allies has been time and coming with this attack in 1994. Menem was a corrupt president. He may have had some sympathies with the cause because he is Syrian, and he was a muslim before converting. But the question is should Mr. Galeano be tried even though he has diplomatic immunity?