Thursday, 11th September 2008
Appeasement, betrayal and massacre history repeats itself in Iraq
The seeds of a humanitarian catastrophe are being sown in the northern Iraqi province of Diyala. Some 3,500 Iranian dissidents living in Camp Ashraf face imminent and serious threats to their lives, including expulsion, imprisonment, torture and execution, were the US military to withdraw its current protection of them. They belong to Iran’s principal opposition movement, the People's Mojahedin Organisation of Iran (PMOI/MEK). The Iranian mullahs regard Ashraf as the existential threat to their rule and have vowed to wipe it out. They could make their dream a reality if the US hands over Ashraf’s protection to those who would be willing to do the bidding for the mullahs in Iraq. If that happens, the US would be violating well-established international laws and treaties.
Ashraf residents took refuge in Iraq after thousands of their PMOI colleagues were imprisoned and ruthlessly executed (120,000 so far) by the mullahs in Iran. Once in neighboring Iraq, they transformed a dry Diyala desert into a sprawling city. Thus, Ashraf was born and the dream of a free Iran lived on.
After the invasion of Iraq, Ashraf residents voluntarily disarmed. Months of private interviews by various US government organs found them not to have been involved in any wrong doing or acts of terrorism. Subsequently, they were recognised as “protected persons” under the Fourth Geneva Convention by the US. Legally speaking, this means that the US is bound to guarantee their fundamental human rights and safety, even if it would no longer be an occupying force in Iraq. As such, a US military battalion was posted at Camp Ashraf to secure it from the mullahs’ already increasing terrorism.
But, a senior White House official has confirmed that talks are underway with Iraq to transfer Ashraf’s control to Iraqi authorities. However, even the simple talk or consideration of such a scenario by the US is tantamount to a grave violation of international humanitarian law, and the Geneva Conventions. This is because so far, the government of Iraq has not acknowledged the minimum rights of the residents of Ashraf. It has never affirmed its commitment to international law, international humanitarian law, the principle of non-refoulement and to the lifting of the restrictions on, and encirclement of, the residents of Camp Ashraf who, as political refugees, enjoy the protection of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 and juridical security.
The mullahs’ dire human rights violations with regards to the PMOI, and their repeated bomb and missile attacks on Camp Ashraf are well-documented by independent observers. Moreover, the mullahs have conspired with their Iraqi cohorts to cut off water, fuel and food supplies to the residents of Ashraf, a thousand of whom are women.
Recently, some senior Iraqi government officials announced that they had drawn up a list of 23 leading 'terrorists' from Camp Ashraf whom they intend to arrest, while the remainder would be handed over to the blood-stained hands of the mullahs. The fact that over three million Iraqi Shiites recently signed a petition offering their support and friendship to the residents of Ashraf has cut no ice with the Iraqi leadership.
With all this in mind, the US is legally forbidden to transfer control of Ashraf residents to any other authority because international law clearly requires the US to take every step necessary to guarantee that its actions would not harm Camp Ashraf refugees. But, transferring those refugees to the Iraqi Government places them in harm’s way, and therefore constitutes a serious violation.
In July 1995, after the United Nations had declared Srebrenica a UN protected 'safe area', 400 Dutch peacekeepers stepped aside and allowed units of the Army of Republika Srpska under the command of General Ratko Mladi?, to massacre an estimated 8,000 Bosnian men and boys. Ashraf’s current situation is reminiscent of such acts of betrayal in history.
Why do we treat our friends so badly and play into the hands of our enemies?
The Iranian Resistance’s charismatic leader, Maryam Rajavi, offers an alternative to either military intervention or appeasement in Iran by empowering the Iranian people to replace the evil mullahs’ regime with a secular democracy. Mrs. Rajavi’s call for restoration of freedom and democracy in Iran, with respect for women's rights and human rights, an end to the death penalty and Sharia law, and the abolition of nuclear weapons, must be supported. But instead of hailing her as a friend and ally, we placed the PMOI on terror lists and maintained it there despite definitive judicial verdicts to the contrary. Competent courts in London and Luxembourg have annulled the listing. Now the torch of appeasement has been passed on to the French Government, which has conspired with Tehran to renew the PMOI’s EU listing on trumped up charges that are again the subject of a challenge in the courts.
And so we once again fail to recognise our true friends. We fail to recognise that appeasing sworn enemies never succeeds. We naively ignore the lessons of history. And now we will be mute observers to the betrayal and brutal murder of 3,500 refugees in Ashraf, unless the US is reminded of its international obligations with regards to the protected persons of Ashraf.
