How Will Raymond Davis Incident Affect US-Pakistan Relations?

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

The State Department remains tight-lipped on the role of the American man recently arrested in Pakistan for murder. The man in question, Raymond Davis, was suspected of being a spy. The Obama administration claimed that Davis had diplomatic immunity and should be set free from Pakistani custody. Last Friday, P.J. Crowley, State Department Spokesman would only say to The Takeaway that Davis is a U.S. Diplomat entitled to diplomatic immunity. You can hear that interview here. But reports out yesterday confirm that Davis was working in a part of a C.I.A. team, as an independent contractor. Either way, what does the case of Raymond Davis mean for the U.S. Pakistan relationship? 

Art Keller, former case officer for the CIA, who worked in Pakistan in 2006 thinks that Davis may have been protecting a C.I.A. case worker and if he was, should be viewed as a hero.

Marvin Weinbaum, scholar in residence at the Middle-East-Institute and former State Department Analyst on Pakistan and Afghanistan, says the new information about Davis does not change the basic international premise behind diplomatic immunity and that Davis should be sent back home.  Weinbaum says we'll have to wait and see if a Pakistani court agrees. We'll find out whether Davis will be tried for murder by March 14th, when the court must hand down its decision to either let Davis go home or to make him stand trial.

Below: Art Keller, former case officer for the CIA, sent this cartoon picture of CIA case officer "sleuth" being protected by GRS officers during the hunt for "WMD." While the search was frustrating and futile, the role of the Global Response Staff (GRS) was still important, keeping the "sleuth" safe. Raymond Davis was GRS.

Guests:

Art Keller and Marvin Weinbaum

Produced by:

Jen Poyant

Comments [3]

achaydost from u.s.a

it not about freeing one it about how we think so differently i mean imagen if the same thing would had happend in u.s and the person would be someone from different country would u.s send them back or fail a crimanl charges against that person the case here is same excepect pakistan is so small and many people have tried to control and shed blood in our country and when it comes to justice the u.s. wants to free its people and not to face the justice wow i want justice for those people who were shot from the back and mr. art if you think davis is a hero then why he acted so cowredley by killing two inncoent people from back and the other one left the country by runing over the third person i dont think he is a hero he is a crimnal and should be charge.

Feb. 22 2011 11:14 PM
freepresss from Earth

its not about its relationship. its about keeping things topsecret and leaving geni (terror) in the bottle (seen to be isalmic, not US sponsored / created). Pls Read These Articles: http://ht.ly/410EY http://ht.ly/410GI

Feb. 22 2011 02:59 PM
Ira Spiegel from Nyack, NY

I'd like to comment on your piece dealing with Raymond Davis. Your presentation of the event was very limited, not thorough in it's examination of the event and in focusing solely on the issue of his "diplomatic immunity" lacked any moral or ethical spine, what so ever. What was not mentioned or taken into consideration in your coverage, was that additional Americans ran over and killed a Pakistani and then fled the country, that Davis was fleeing himself when finally apprehended, that he may in fact be more a Xe body guard then a CIA employee. Your strict look at the event from the American point of view without any examination of the right or wrong of what has happened is a good example of how the United States views many other nations in the world: as a stage on which we can shoot it out, killing innocents with impunity and then flee or expect to be given diplomatic immunity. Our use of "for hire" body guards such as Xe is an issue you might have mentioned. This event is reminiscent of the Blackwater shootout that occurred in Iraq some time back. The issue of Mr Davis's diplomatic immunity would seem to me to be more complex given that the US was slow in owning up to who he is. Anyway the law reads "except in case of a grave crime" and I would think that killing two people, shooting them in the back might be a grave crime.

Feb. 22 2011 02:41 PM

Leave a Comment

Register for your own account so you can vote on comments, save your favorites, and more. Learn more.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. We reserve the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting. By leaving a comment, you agree to New York Public Radio's Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use.