Shayan Ghajar

While little is known about the disappearance of Iranian scientist Shahram Amiri in June 2009 in Saudi Arabia, a great number of conflicting reports surfaced today attempting to explain precisely what has transpired with the Iranian national in the last 13 months. Some give the United States the benefit of the doubt, arguing that Amiri defected willingly and, for any number of hypothetical reasons, seeks to return to Iran.

Others disagree, pointing to Amiri’s claims of abduction in YouTube videos as evidence that the scientist was kidnapped by American and Saudi intelligence units while on Hajj. A third viewpoint contends that Amiri was a false defector, purporting to divulge sensitive information to American intelligence agencies while actually gauging precisely how much the United States knows about Iran’s program.

The controversy surrounds three videos aired in June 2010, each purporting to be Shahram Amiri. In the first video, the man introduces himself as Amiri and alleges that he was kidnapped by American and Saudi intelligence agents while in Medinah, then tortured and pressured to say he had willingly defected. A second video was posted to YouTube shortly thereafter, with what appears to be the same individual, claiming to be safe and happy in the United States, pursuing higher education and uninvolved in any security issues. In the second video, the man can be clearly seen reading from a script. A third video emerged later in June, reiterating that he had been kidnapped and wanted release back to Iran. In the third video, Amiri also claimed to have temporarily escaped CIA agents in Virginia.

The BBC has posted a timeline of events in the Amiri saga, which highlights the dramatic inconsistencies, and demonstrates the difficulty in verifying any of the following scenarios.

Scenarios in which Amiri defected

The BBC’s Jon Leyne advanced one possible scenario in which Amiri may have defected, then decided to return to Iran. If Amiri defected, Leyne argues, it is possible–though there is, as yet, no evidence to substantiate the possibility—that his wife and child, still in Iran, may have been used to pressure him to return. The tactic is well-known to Iranian exiles abroad, many of whom have reported threats against their families still in Iran as a means of pressuring them to cease activities against the government. If Amiri defected, and his family was subsequently threatened as a result, it is plausible that he would seek to return to keep them safe. The Financial Times agrees with this analysis.

The BBC quotes unnamed intelligence officials in the Obama administration as saying that after Amiri defected, he became concerned for his family still in Iran and decided to return home. Nevertheless, many questions would remain should the American version of events prove to be true. Amiri’s videos pose one of the difficulties in fully accepting the White House’s version—why, if Amiri was free, was there a two month gap between the filming of the first video, in April, and its posting to the internet, in June? Another unanswered issue is the second video, in which a visibly nervous Amiri, reading a script or cue card above the camera, states he came to America by choice simply to continue his education. Were Amiri a willing defector, and concerned for the safety of his family, it is inconceivable he would willingly endanger them by publically confessing to defecting to Iran’s greatest nemesis.

The Guardian, too, referenced the possibility of Amiri’s family being threatened. Citing unnamed “analysts,” the Guardian says that at one point Amiri was calling his wife in Iran on Skype, when Iranian intelligence agents interrupted the call and threatened to torture her if Amiri did not return. Aside from the complete absence of substantiation for this claim, the Guardian is also apparently ignorant of Skype’s famously impervious encryption, which renders it all but impossible to crack even for the National Security Agency, which has for some time offered an as-yet unclaimed reward of billions of dollars to anyone capable of cracking the code. Additionally, Amiri’s wife has repeatedly emphasized she had no contact with her husband and was desperate to talk to him.

Other scenarios in which Amiri defected are not so much concrete reasons for his desire to return than rebuttals of his claims to have been kidnapped. The official White House statement on the issue, from Press Secretary P. J. Crowley, is that Amiri would not have been allowed to publish YouTube videos if he had been kidnapped and secured in intelligence facilities.

Scenarios in which Amiri was kidnapped

The official Iranian story is that Amiri was kidnapped in Saudi Arabia as his first YouTube video alleges, and through personal heroics managed to post his videos. The second video, Iran claims, was made under duress. The Iranian state-owned or affiliated news agencies have had multiple inconsistencies in their stories, reporting at various times that Amiri escaped to the Pakistani embassy, or that he was escorted by CIA agents who intended to expatriate him. Even his time of arrival at the embassy has been inconsistent in the Iranian media, with one article stating he arrived at 6:30PM on Monday, and another at 10PM. In the past few hours, most agencies in Iran have amended their stories to say Amiri was released by the CIA: “Analysts believe that the US administration was forced to hand over the abducted Iranian scholar following intensive intelligence and media efforts by the Islamic Republic of Iran,” Fars News reports.

This version of events has its own inconsistencies, however. As P.J. Crowley pointed out, it is unlikely that Mr. Amiri would have been able to escape heavily armed and highly trained guards multiple times to produce his videos, and unlikelier still that if he were actually abducted, he would have been allowed any contact with the outside world. It is not impossible, however, that Amiri, through luck or skill, did manage a few times in his 13 months under guard to evade his captors, if he was in fact abducted.

A third possibility

The Voice of America has advanced a third scenario, which would explain much of the inconsistencies if true—though absolutely no evidence to substantiate it has yet surfaced. In this alternate scenario, VoA argues, Amiri may be a false defector, sent by Iran to offer little substantive information to American intelligence agencies while attempting to gauge precisely how much the U.S. knows about the Iranian nuclear program. Amiri would have had to divulge some substantive information about the program to establish trust with American agencies, though not enough to compromise Iranian efforts. During the process, by taking note of the questions asked of him by intelligence agents, Amiri would gain an idea of just how much or how little America knows about Iran’s program. This scenario would explain the dramatically conflicting videos, as well as Amiri’s decision to return to Iran. Again, however, no evidence is forthcoming to substantiate VoA’s theory, and, should it be true, it is unlikely will anytime soon.

At this point, it is impossible to know precisely what Amiri has been involved in for the last 13 months.