Secret Docs Reveal Putin Ally's Role in Missing U.S. Reporter's Disappearance
Tice, a freelance journalist, was abducted outside the Syrian capital of Damascus in August 2012. He has remained missing ever since—though the BBC now claims to have confirmation that Assad's government, which was overthrown in December 2024, had Tice in its detention.
Washington, D.C., has previously accused the Syrian government under Assad—who fled to Russia and the protection of his ally Vladimir Putin—of being responsible for Tice's disappearance. The U.S. has also questioned the authenticity of a video that emerged shortly after Tice vanished, showing him blindfolded and being held at gunpoint, with analysts suggesting the scene may have been staged to give the appearance that a jihadist group took Tice.
No group or nation has claimed responsibility for Tice's disappearance. The BBC now reports it has the first evidence that the Syrian government detained the reporter.
The broadcaster claims Tice was captured in a suburb outside Damascus and then held by an Assadist paramilitary group called the National Defense Forces (NDF). One document marked 'top secret' obtained by the BBC said Tice was kept in a detention facility in Damascus in 2012.
'Austin's value was understood,' a former NDF member told the broadcaster, describing Tice as a 'card' to be played in any future diplomatic negotiations with the U.S.
Tice was held in the facility until at least February 2013, another Syrian official told the BBC, during which time he was visited at least twice by a doctor. The outlet reported that blood tests showed Tice had a viral infection at the time.
He was later spotted by a visitor to the facility who told the BBC Tice was being treated slightly better than Syrian prisoners, but that 'he looked sad, and the joy had gone from his face.'
At some point between late 2012 and early 2013, Tice is reported to have escaped from the facility after squeezing through a window in his cell, but was quickly recaptured. He was also said to have been interrogated twice by a Syrian intelligence officer.
Following the downfall of the Assad regime in December 2024, then-President Joe Biden told a press conference he believed Tice was alive and was committed to returning him to his family. Biden also admitted the government had 'no direct evidence' of his whereabouts and said: 'We still have to identify where he is.'
Tice's mother, Debra, said at the time that a 'significant source' had told her Austin was alive and was being 'treated well' by his captors. After the regime fell and political prisoners were freed, Tice has still not been found.
A former U.S. Marine captain, Tice served in Iraq and Afghanistan before traveling to Syria in 2012 to report on the country's civil war as a freelancer. He is thought to be one of the longest-held American hostages in history.
Around 100,000 people were disappeared by the Assad regime, according to the Syrian Network for Human Rights.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
2 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Facing up to the stark realities of Gaza
Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Netanyahu recently announced that Israel will take over the Gaza strip to 'further the elimination of Hamas.' It's another step in his attempt to annex Gaza. The United States has always considered Israel to be an ally. We have sent billions of dollars worth of weaponry and other aid to Israel. But Netanyahu is not our friend. The United States needs to stop supporting this power-hungry despot. Advertisement Sandra Breen Warwick, RI All eyes are on the innocents of Gaza Re ' Advertisement As plans to escalate the war against Hamas come to light, the horror of starvation in Gaza increases daily. The people of the world are watching the heartless killing of innocents in Gaza — women, children, and the disabled. Israel, Hamas, and Iran are directly culpable. But we American taxpayers are financing this horror. We are paying for the fighter planes and ammunition used by armed Israelis to rain death and destruction on Gaza's people. We are complicit in the horrifying starvation of innocents, as the eyes of the world watch children struggle for life and die from lack of food. Unless this horror is stopped immediately and the besieged innocents of Gaza have access to food, water, and safety, then the aggressors — both Israel and Hamas — should be shunned by the world. A coalition led by the United Nations must be given direct access to Gaza, with armed security and a variety of peacekeepers paving the way. America, my country, must lead the way to peace in Gaza. We have been the world's peacekeepers since the end of World War II. Why are we now abandoning the innocent, the vulnerable, the starving children? John J. Drew Boston The writer is the former president/CEO of Action for Boston Community Development. History is repeating itself, and it needs to stop It is not anti-Jewish to be against the Israeli government's actions in Gaza, which many experts conclude amount to genocide. Such mass starvation is an affront to humanity. Competent humanitarian agencies need to be given access to those starving; the annihilation of the Palestinian people needs to stop. President Bill Clinton wavered and did not call the Rwanda tragedy a genocide until it was too late. History is now repeating itself. Advertisement John Hammock Belmont The writer is president of Episcopalians for Global Reconciliation and former president of Oxfam America. There probably won't be a 'Diary of a Young Girl' from Gaza Why we will likely never get to know the 'Anne Frank' of Gaza: 1. There is no attic in Gaza. 2. There is no food in Gaza. 3. There is no neighbor who can protect her. 4. Her family is likely injured or dead. 5. International journalists are not allowed in Gaza. 6. Soon, she will be dead. Kathleen Curtis Marblehead Some needed momentum for a two-state solution Re ' Ron Israel Milton Hisham Jabi Nablus, West Bank The writers are members of the board of the Global Citizens' Initiative, a nonprofit focused on bringing people and organizations together to solve global problems. Where is the outrage over Hamas's actions? Where's the outrage? Hamas recently released video showing two barely alive, emaciated Israeli hostages abducted from the Nova music festival during the Hamas invasion on Oct. 7, 2023. Outrage against the tragedies of the continuing war in the aftermath of that vicious attack appears to be selective. It is reserved for Israel as the perceived sole perpetrator of all the misery now engulfing Gaza. Hamas, which for 20 years brutally oppressed the population under its control, in part through holding the reins of food and aid distribution, gets a pass from the international community. The new video evidence of Hamas's starvation of these hostages can't move the needle. Instead, France, Britain, and Canada have announced their intention to recognize a Palestinian state, under various conditions. With no plan for effective governance in place, how will that help? Absent a coordinated agreement for responsible administration of Gaza by a coalition of Arab and Western power players, it won't. Advertisement David Greenfield Waltham Israelis and Americans need to take a stand I agree with John Benjamin's piece 'Israel is losing America' (Ideas, Aug. 10). The Gaza atrocities are terrible. The United States would have lost worldwide support if we conducted our Afghanistan war with such callous regard for civilians. Israel must be held responsible for its conduct. At the same time, the Trump administration is using American Jews and Israel as a divisive lever in the United States. His extortion of universities and companies is based in part on claims of antisemitism, while completely ignoring anti-Palestinian views. The good people of Israel, like the good people of the United States, need to reject the policies of their extremist governments and enable freedom and equality for all. John Greichen Jr. Newport, R.I.
San Francisco Chronicle
3 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump's aggressive push to take over DC policing may be a template for an approach in other cities
WASHINGTON (AP) — The left sees President Donald Trump's attempted takeover of Washington law enforcement as part of a multifront march to autocracy — 'vindictive authoritarian rule,' as one activist put it — and as an extraordinary thing to do in rather ordinary times on the streets of the capital. To the right, it's a bold move to fracture the crust of Democratic urban bureaucracy and make D.C. a better place to live. Where that debate settles — if it ever does — may determine whether Washington, a symbol for America in all its granite glory, history, achievement, inequality and dysfunction, becomes a model under the imprint of Trump for how cities are policed, cleaned up and run, or ruined. Under the name of his Making D.C. Safe and Beautiful Task Force, Trump put some 800 National Guard troops on Washington streets this past week, declaring at the outset, 'Our capital city has been overtaken by violent gangs and bloodthirsty criminals.' Grunge was also on his mind. 'If our capital is dirty, our whole country is dirty, and they don't respect us.' He then upped the stakes by declaring federal control of the district's police department and naming an emergency chief. That set off alarms and prompted local officials to sue to stop the effort. 'I have never seen a single government action that would cause a greater threat to law and order than this dangerous directive,' Police Chief Pamela Smith said. On Friday, the Trump administration partially retreated from its effort to seize control of the Metropolitan Police Department when a judge, skeptical that the president had the authority to do what he tried to do, urged both sides to reach a compromise, which they did — at least for now. Trump's Justice Department agreed to leave Smith in control, while still intending to instruct her department on law enforcement practices. In a new memo, Attorney General Pam Bondi directed the force to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement regardless of any city law. In this heavily Democratic city, local officials and many citizens did not like the National Guard deployment. At the same time, they acknowledged the Republican president had the right to order it because of the federal government's unique powers in the district. But Trump's attempt to seize formal control of the police department, for the first time since D.C. gained a partial measure of autonomy in the Home Rule Act of 1973, was their red line. When the feds stepped in For sure, there have been times when the U.S. military has been deployed to American streets, but almost always in the face of a riot or a calamitous event like the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Trump's use of force was born of an emergency that he saw and city officials — and many others — did not. A stranger to nuance, Trump has used the language of emergency to justify much of what he's done: his deportations of foreigners, his tariffs, his short-term deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles, and now his aggressive intervention into Washington policing. Washington does have crime and endemic homelessness, like every city in the country. But there was nothing like an urban fire that the masses thought needed to be quelled. Violent crime is down, as it is in many U.S. cities. Washington is also a city about which most Americans feel ownership — or at least that they have a stake. More than 25 million of them visited in 2024, a record year, plus over 2 million people from abroad. It's where middle schoolers on field trips get to see what they learn about in class — and perhaps to dance to pop tunes with the man with the music player so often in front of the White House. Washington is part federal theme park, with its historic buildings and museums, and part downtown, where restaurants and lobbyists outnumber any corporate presence. Neighborhoods range from the places where Jeff Bezos set a record for a home purchase price to destitute streets in economically depressed areas that are also magnets for drugs and crime. In 1968, the capital was a city on fire with riots. Twenty years later, a murder spree and crack epidemic fed the sense of a place out of control. But over the last 30 years, the city's population and its collective wealth have swelled. A cooked-up emergency? Against that backdrop, Philadelphia's top prosecutor, District Attorney Larry Krasner, a Democrat, assailed Trump's moves in Washington. 'You're talking about an emergency, really?' Krasner said, as if speaking with the president. 'Or is it that you're talking about an emergency because you want to pretend everything is an emergency so that you can roll tanks?" In Washington, a coalition of activists called Not Above the Law denounced what they saw as just the latest step by Trump to seize levers of power he has no business grasping. 'The onslaught of lawlessness and autocratic activities has escalated,' said Lisa Gilbert, co-chair of the group and co-president of Public Citizen. 'The last two weeks should have crystallized for all Americans that Donald Trump will not stop until democracy is replaced by vindictive authoritarian rule.' Fifty miles northeast, in the nearest major city, Baltimore's Democratic mayor criticized what he saw as Trump's effort to distract the public from economic pain and 'America's falling standing in the world.' 'Every mayor and police chief in America works with our local federal agents to do great work — to go after gun traffickers, to go after violent organizations,' Brandon Scott said. 'How is taking them off of that job, sending them out to just patrol the street, making our country safer?' But the leader of the D.C. Police Union, Gregg Pemberton, endorsed Trump's intervention — while saying it should not become permanent. 'We stand with the president in recognizing that Washington, D.C., cannot continue on this trajectory,' Pemberton said. From his vantage point, 'Crime is out of control, and our officers are stretched beyond their limits.' The Home Rule Act lets a president invoke certain emergency powers over the police department for 30 days, after which Congress must decide whether to extend the period. Trump's attempt to use that provision stirred interest among some Republicans in Congress in giving him an even freer hand. Among them, Rep. Andy Ogles of Tennessee drafted a resolution that would eliminate the time limit on federal control. This, he told Fox News Digital, would 'give the president all the time and authority he needs to crush lawlessness, restore order, and reclaim our capital once and for all.' Which raises a question that Trump has robustly hinted at and others are wondering, too: If there is success in the district — at least, success in the president's eyes — what might that mean for other American cities he thinks need to be fixed? Where does — where could — the federal government go next?
Time Magazine
3 hours ago
- Time Magazine
Trump and Putin Didn't Make a Deal, but Putin Still Won
During the press conference at the end of his brief and lukewarm summit with Vladimir Putin in Alaska, an uncharacteristically subdued Donald Trump said something painfully honest: "There's no deal until there's a deal." There was no deal. In many ways, Trump and Putin got the show they wanted. The ubiquitous television graphics, TRUMP-PUTIN SUMMIT, with fluttering American and Russian flags. The split-screen of Air Force 1 and Russia's executive plane landing at a remote airport in Alaska, and then the two protagonists walking down a skinny red carpet like the end of a buddy movie. The grip-and-grin handshakes, with Trump patting Putin's hand in a gesture known to maître d's everywhere. The cosy ride in "the Beast," a prize not even offered to close allies. Trump is likely happy because the eyes of the world are upon him and he was executive producing the images on the world's television screens. (And no one was talking about Jeffrey Epstein). Putin is happy because a Russian president is always happy when they are treated as equal to American presidents. Remember, Barack Obama said Russia was a second-rate, "regional power." Putin got what he wanted: a summit with an American president, something normally you have to make elaborate compromises to get. An indicted war criminal who cannot travel to over 100 nations, the Russian President literally had a red carpet rolled out for him on United States territory by an American president. And he didn't have to give up anything for it—he just had to show up. Read More: The Real Danger of the Trump-Putin Summit At the press conference, Putin talked about how close Russia was to America (shades of Sarah Palin) and claimed that Russian trade with American has increased by 20%. He made sure to praise Trump in the over-the-top way that has become customary in diplomacy with America. Trump was uncharacteristically restrained and circumspect. Even though Putin had alluded to an agreement, Trump did not do so. The self-professed world's greatest dealmaker left without a deal. He did, however, get in several references to the 'Russia hoax,' while Vlad smirked. The truth is, Trump needed a deal more than Putin did. 'Deals are what I do,' he said, and he didn't do one. In a larger way, the nothing-burger outcome exposes the flaws in Trump's theory of diplomacy. Trump seems to believe personal warmth between leaders will make his adversary more likely to compromise or agree with him. That is naïve and delusional. Earlier this week a White House spokesperson described Trump as a 'realist.' This is the classic foreign policy term, in contrast to a foreign policy idealist, whose legacy comes from Woodrow Wilson and his quest for a League of Nations. But Henry Kissinger, the ultimate American realist, said nations have no permanent friends or enemies, they have interests. That's something Donald Trump doesn't quite understand. Trump stands for himself. Putin stands for Russia. Putin's goals are unchanging; his smile and his handshake are fleeting. Long before Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin wanted to Make Russia Great Again. I spent several hours with Putin in 2006 for TIME's Person of the Year cover, and it was in that interview that he said the greatest tragedy of the 20th century was the disintegration of the Soviet Union. I remember we all wondered for a moment whether that was really what he had said, but the transcript bore it out. He believes it, devoutly. He was a KGB officer in Dresden when the Wall came down, and he was bereft. The Russian President has always wanted to put the Soviet Union back together again. (His foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, was spotted wearing a USSR sweatshirt ahead of the Summit.) Putin believes in a kind of Russian exceptionalism with Russia as the great power between East and West. Putin is nostalgic not just for the Cold War, but the Russian empire of the czars. He has a profound and angry grievance about the West and America. He told me Westerners regard Russians as monkeys. (Yes, he said that.) But then he also told me Russian voters were not sophisticated enough to choose their own leaders. (Yes, he said that too.) Under his leadership, Russia has been trying to destabilize the West for decades. Just last week the U.S. Justice Department announced that Russian hackers had penetrated the federal court system. Putin has been trying to put space between the US and Europe for decades. In his eyes, West and America are always the aggressors and Russia is always the victim—even when negotiating about the war in Ukraine. Read More: Trump's Make-or-Break Moment with Putin Normally, in any wartime negotiation, the country gaining territory does not want to negotiate or give up anything, while the country losing territory wants to negotiate and is willing to compromise. Russia is gaining territory, slowly; Ukraine is losing territory, grudgingly. Russia has a 50-year goal, to re-unite parts of the old Soviet Union; Ukraine has a more immediate goal, to stop the war and not give up any territory to do so. When Putin said during the press conference that they still needed to address the 'root causes' of the conflict, that was a hint to what may have transpired inside. Putin can talk for hours about the idea that Ukraine is not a nation, that the Kievan Rus is the basis of Russia, that the Russian Orthodox Church grew out of the Ukrainian one, and he could have spent the whole time on any of those subjects. And maybe he did. According to the 2020 Senate Intelligence Committee report, after the TIME Person of the Year cover came out, Trump sent Putin a handwritten note of congratulations to saying, 'As you probably heard, I am a big fan of yours!' Putin is still milking Trump's fanboy affection. He was the big winner today because he didn't have to compromise before or after the meeting. He got the superpower treatment even though he is a war criminal. He got equivalence with an American president on the world stage. Zelensky won by not losing. Ukraine could have been crippled today, and instead they live to fight another day. It's true that no deal is better than a bad deal. But what is the Dealmaker-in-Chief without a deal?
