Iraq's response to the alleged massacre of Iranian exiles in Camp Ashraf is a window on the country's human rights progress
By Kate Allen
This commentary was published in The Guardian on 14/04/2011
This commentary was published in The Guardian on 14/04/2011
Iraqi soldiers patrol near burned trailers at Camp Ashraf, Iraq, last week. Photograph: Karim Kadim/AP
It's a little-known story outside of specialist circles but the strange fate of a group of Iranians exiled in Iraq is becoming an important measure of Iraq's willingness to adhere to international human rights standards.
Having waged an armed struggle against the Iranian authorities dating back to the 1970s and the days of the shah, they were offered shelter by Saddam Hussein's Iraqi government in 1986 and they've remained to this day.
It's not the first time there have been deadly attacks of this kind. In July 2009 Iraqi security forces bulldozed their way into the camp and reportedly used batons, tear gas and water cannon against unarmed residents. As clashes developed the Iraqi forces opened fire, killing at least nine people and injuring some 400. In addition, 36 residents were arrested, held for over two months (in defiance of court orders for their release) and reportedly tortured before being released without charge.
The residents of Camp Ashraf have every reason to feel they're living in a state of siege. A constant military presence has made it difficult for inhabitants to access medical treatment inside and outside the camp. An Iraqi security committee controls what medical supplies go in as well as who can travel outside the camp for specialist treatment. There were worrying reports on Friday of wounded people who could not be treated because of inadequate medicines or equipment.
Drowned out by Libya, Syria and Ivory Coast, violence at Camp Ashraf is at risk of being all but ignored. Amnesty is calling for an independent investigation into Friday's blood-letting as well as assurances that no one at Ashraf is going to be forced out of Iraq if their lives are put in danger.
Since the mid-1980s, Iraq has been host to a contingent of Iranians opposed to the Iranian government. They are the People's Mujahideen Organisation of Iran (PMOI), also known by various other names including Mujahedin-e Khalq.
Having waged an armed struggle against the Iranian authorities dating back to the 1970s and the days of the shah, they were offered shelter by Saddam Hussein's Iraqi government in 1986 and they've remained to this day.
Since Saddam was toppled in 2003 their sojourn in Iraq has been a fraught affair. The invading US forces first bombed their bases, seeing them as a military threat. After the invasion they were disarmed, accorded "protected person" status under the Geneva conventions and afforded protection by US forces at Camp Ashraf, a sprawling informal settlement in Diyala province, 40 miles north-east of Baghdad that currently houses around 3,400 people.
From the middle of 2009, responsibility for them was transferred to the Iraqi authorities, since which time their future has become increasingly uncertain. This week the Iraqi government said that the PMOI must leave the country by the end of the year. The official ultimatum includes the declaration that they would be forced out "using all means".
Given recent events it's a chilling statement. Last Friday Iraqi troops in armoured personnel carriers moved into the camp and reportedly opened fire on residents who had tried to resist the incursion. Video clips uploaded by the PMOI to YouTube appear to show Iraqi soldiers firing indiscriminately into crowds and using vehicles to try to run people down. It's impossible to verify a figure, but the PMOI claim that 34 Camp Ashraf residents were killed and 300 injured.
It's not the first time there have been deadly attacks of this kind. In July 2009 Iraqi security forces bulldozed their way into the camp and reportedly used batons, tear gas and water cannon against unarmed residents. As clashes developed the Iraqi forces opened fire, killing at least nine people and injuring some 400. In addition, 36 residents were arrested, held for over two months (in defiance of court orders for their release) and reportedly tortured before being released without charge.
The residents of Camp Ashraf have every reason to feel they're living in a state of siege. A constant military presence has made it difficult for inhabitants to access medical treatment inside and outside the camp. An Iraqi security committee controls what medical supplies go in as well as who can travel outside the camp for specialist treatment. There were worrying reports on Friday of wounded people who could not be treated because of inadequate medicines or equipment.
Meanwhile, the Iraqi authorities are barely paying lip-service to their obligation to properly investigate these deeply troubling events. Nouri al-Maliki's government has said it will investigate last week's violence, but it said that in 2009 as well. In common with scores of other "investigations" in the country, nothing more has been heard of it.
And neither is Iraq coming under much international pressure over Camp Ashraf. The UK's foreign office minister Alistair Burt said he was "disturbed" by the loss of life and supported a UN monitoring mission to the camp, but generally there's been relatively little reaction. A letter in the Guardian bemoaned the "blanket of silence" surrounding it.
Drowned out by Libya, Syria and Ivory Coast, violence at Camp Ashraf is at risk of being all but ignored. Amnesty is calling for an independent investigation into Friday's blood-letting as well as assurances that no one at Ashraf is going to be forced out of Iraq if their lives are put in danger.
Camp Ashraf doesn't come close to fitting into the "Arab spring" narrative (though meanwhile Iraq's own protests have in fact been well-attended, ruthlessly put down and almost totally unreported). But the world should start paying attention to this forgotten story. How Iraq treats the residents of Camp Ashraf will provide an important window into how far Iraq has come in respecting human rights.
No comments:
Post a Comment