Shouldn't we defend our embassies with force ?

Julie

You should protect the walls of your country son.

melvinschmugmeier

we do. In most of our overseas embassies we have Marines stationed in them. The majority of them are not highly staffed so if 1,000 rioters came by they'd have a tough time dealing with the situation.

earl

of course we should.i am not sure if it's due to international law or custom but the embassy is part of the country it represents.therefore,an attack on the embassy is considered as an attack on the country itself and as such would warrant retaliation.all legal.

Wondering what woman think

Actually that's the Job of the Host Country, but yes if some one comes over the fence of the Embassy they just entered the Sovereign territory of that Embassy's Country. So in our case they'd be in U.S. territory and subject to our laws.

Titan

Do you want the guards to shoot the protestors?, it is a bad bad idea.

YA is a sham

Yes. Foreign embassies are sovereign territory.

BubbaGump

The mission of an Embassy is to act as site from which the diplomatic representation of a country carries out bi-lateral relations with the country which hosts the Embassy. Thus the Embassy seeks to improve relations with the host country as a general rule. Besides carrying out foreign policy, the Embassy also conducts public diplomacy to try to improve the image of Americans abroad.

As the representation of its country abroad, the Embassy is highly symbolic and will be the site for protests and attacks as unfortuantely occur more than most people people are aware. The security of Embassies abroad consists of two layers. The outer layer is provided by the host nation. It is the responsibility of the host nation to provide adequate security forces to protect a diplomatic mission located within its borders. When it fails, it is a disgrace to that nation and should be a source of shame to the people of that country. In the recent case of Lebanon, the Prime Minister apologized for their failure to protect the Danish Embassy. The result of a country's failure to protect a diplomatic mission can be a cessation of diplomatic relations, or the ambassador being recalled to the capitol for consultations, and more harsh sanctions.

The second layer of security consists of the Embassy's internal security forces. This is usually managed by law enforcement officials from that country and is staffed by members of the military. In the case of the United States, agents of the Diplomatic Security Service manage a security program and supervise the work of a Marine Security Guard Detachment.

Prudent missions do not try to fight off protestors by gunning them down as they are storming the walls. This does not send the right signal to the host country, the majority of whose citizens are not involved in the protest and would be shocked to see their fellow citizens getting mowed down. However, internal security forces of most Embassies would seek to lock down the facility and then protect life and sensitive areas as required.

Adding an element of violence to an abhorent act such as killing diplomats and torching embassies makes no sense and indeed blunts the ability of the country whose embassy was torched to gain concessions in the aftermath and to heal the images of citizens being shot by Marines, or Ghurkas, or other security forces. It is the mission of the Embassy to carry out a conversation with the host country, not engage in violence. However, one notices that many embassies are taking passive measures to protect facilities and staff through enhanced design against bombings and riots.

de_nyc_3

We do defend our embassies. Every U.S. embassy is guarded by a small group of specially trained U.S. Marines a.k.a MSG (Marine Security Guards). Depending on the location of the embassy (i.e. in a hot zone like some countries in Africa) the number of Marines will vary. They are entrusted to guard the grounds of the embassy as it is considered a part of the United States. If there was an attempt to overrun the embassy I assure you that they would be able to handle the siuation until reinforcements arrive.

e_jackson_st

No; Not unless lives are at stake, and we need to learn from Iran Hostage taking in that embassy.
As we are guests in a forgein country. Yes the embassy is suppose to be soverign, but in reality, we are surrounded by a sovereign people in their own country. All too often the embassy becomes the Object of retaliation or target for some sort of protest. But that alone does't give us the right to respond in kind. The Best evacuation plan possiable will not prevent the shedding of blood. Only not being there and being in harms way.

This is a diplomatic answer to a diplomatic question.

Force is for the "routine protection of the staff" not the compounds and the force is only used to stand off or escape from an embassy.

Not protect it from abuse of grounds and fences or potential misuse by outsiders along the walls or vandelism. Guards are suppose to call the local police to do that kind of work. When as in Iran the government turned on the compound and those inside . . well you can research the rest.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: