I think you might want to consider releasing Alexander Aan for a few reasons, but I’m going to mostly skip the ones about tourism and respect among nations.
Let’s talk about 2 things: what Alexander Aan actually did, and what the charge is:
1 Alexander Aan voiced his opinion on Facebook. He didn’t libel, slander, attack, threaten, defraud, blackmail or give away state secrets. He merely voiced his opinion on a matter that is considered worth discussion to a great many people around the world: religion. If you don’t consider religion to be worth discussion, I suggest your office not discuss it, but allow your people to if they so choose.
2 The charge was “deliberately spreading information inciting religious hatred and animosity,” which seems revealing.
Is there a similar provision prohibiting inciting secular hatred and animosity? And if not, do you realize that your very law implies that people lose their reason and become hateful when concerned with religious matters?
The information spread was fairly innocuous in and of itself. If Alexander Aan had voiced his opinion that Sun Tze was attracted to his daughter-in-law or had intercourse with his wife’s maid, it may have slightly irritated people who admire Sun Tze, but they wouldn’t have done anything about it beyond writing responses on the internet or maybe posting a youtube response. As for Alexander Aan’s declaration that he personally doesn’t believe in a god… And? Yes, he was “deliberately spreading” that information, but the hatred and animosity that resulted is the responsibility of those who harbor those feelings.
There are only a few cases in law where people are commonly held not responsible for controlling their own feelings: when they are deemed incapable due to being children, or insane, or in rare cases, when a third party drugged them.
So, when your government as good as says that your religious citizens are incapable of controlling their own feelings and actions, when you imply that one nonbeliever has more control over the actions of your religious citizens than those citizens do- are you comparing those religious citizens to children, to crazy people, or to the chemically impaired?