Unlimited Access. Try it Today! Your First 10 Days Always $0.99
News Opinion Op-Eds

America abandons its responsibility for Iranian dissidents in Iraq

In 2003, I served as a senior military officer at Camp Ashraf, Iraq. In keeping with my responsibility as an oath-bound Army officer and under the Geneva Convention, I made a solemn promise to the group of 3,000 Iranian dissidents living there. I assumed U.S. Army responsibility for the security of these people, who were living in fear of being hunted by the Iranian regime and its allied Shiia death squads in Iraq. Initially considered "terrorists," the dissidents were detained, disarmed, confined, subjected to military intelligence and FBI screening and ultimately guaranteed protected persons status under the Geneva Convention. This responsibility was not merely mine but America's.

Last month, 52 of those same residents we swore to protect — and in some cases knew personally — were massacred by the very troops we trained and to which we handed responsibility for protection of the camp. It was the fifth such attack.

As U.S. forces withdrew from Iraq, the State Department negotiated a three-way agreement with the United Nations mission in Iraq and the Iraqi government under which the Iraqis would fulfill the security promise we had made to the dissidents. Available evidence overwhelmingly supports the contention that Iraqi security forces themselves were either the perpetrators or complicit in the killings. The 3,000 people that we turned over to the Iraqis under a promise of protection are now in danger of being totally wiped out.

The Iraqi government has denied involvement in the latest attack, in which 52 unarmed men and women were shot to death, many execution-style, including some lying injured on gurneys in the medical clinic. I find the Iraqi denial simply unbelievable. This was an hours-long assault on a facility closely guarded by Iraqi security forces. Their main checkpoint was within 20 meters of one of the murders. The distinctive blue trucks belonging to Iraqi security forces are clearly visible in photos and videos made by the victims during the assault.

The attackers used explosives and U.S.-made small arms. They wore U.S.-provided uniforms and boots. The handcuffs used to tie the hands of unarmed men and women before they were shot through the head are U.S.-made. Video taken at the start of the attack shows the attackers employing U.S.-style tactical movement techniques. It is beyond the realm of possibility to believe that Iraqi troops were not directly involved.

Iraq is once more descending into a bitter and protracted civil war. As much as we may wish to put Iraq in the rearview mirror, it is impossible to ignore the rising tempo of sectarian attacks. Suicide bombings and civilian deaths are again rapidly on the rise. Policymakers say that Iranian influence is a major part of the problem. Iran is undeterred by the greatly-diminished U.S. presence, and spillover from the Syrian civil war is undoubtedly contributing to Iraq's slide back into chaos. In the middle of this civil disintegration are the surviving Iranian refugees, right where we left them.

The U.S. State Department remains oblivious to the risk posed by the rapidly deteriorating security situation and the growing Iranian threat the massacre at Camp Ashraf portends. The official reaction to the massacre was telling. Wendy Sherman, undersecretary of state for political affairs, testified before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations last month that the refugees were safe because they were being provided "sandbags."

The dissidents are now concentrated in the ironically named "Camp Liberty" on the outskirts of Baghdad. This facility does not have T-walls for mortar protection. It is surrounded by the same security forces that likely perpetrated the attack on Camp Ashraf. Even more worrisome than a lack of basic force protection measures, the Obama administration fails to see that the assault on the unarmed Iranian dissidents is itself a contemptuous signal that the Iraqi government is effectively under Iranian control. A massacre in a dusty Iraqi camp has huge implications to America's leadership across the region.

Our responsibility is clear. There is no moral gray area. As Secretary John Kerry said on April 19, "Part of American leadership is ... standing up for those who fight for their own rights ... sometimes in the most desolate places, without support. It is our effort to stand up for the universal rights of all people."

Secretary Kerry should heed his own words and stand for the voiceless Iranian refugees huddled in Camp Liberty. These people, most still carrying our "protected persons" passes in their pockets, are living in the shadow of rapidly spreading civil war and looming Iranian hegemony. The only true protection for them now is an immediate humanitarian evacuation to secure asylum in the U.S. as political refugees. Only in this way can America redeem its promise and written commitment to these residents who trusted our words. The deteriorating security situation in Camp Liberty and the inability and unwillingness of the Iraqis to protect them renders this decision time-critical. Delay equals death.

Col. Thomas Cantwell was commander of the 324th MP Battalion, based at Camp Ashraf from May until October 2003. He lives in Frederick. His email is thomas.cantwell@wildblue.net.

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • ISIS should be described as murderers, not militants
    ISIS should be described as murderers, not militants

    The Sun's report on the burning to death of the captured Jordanian pilot refers to his murderers as "militants" ("After Jordanian's death, U.S. moves pilot rescue aircraft closer to battlefield," Feb. 5). The juxtaposition of the barbarity of the murderers coupled with the anodyne description...

  • U.S. should attack ISIS now
    U.S. should attack ISIS now

    I write as a 93-year-old retired educator who worked in a classroom for 35 years, 32 of which were as the principal of an independent middle school and before that as a Naval Reserve Officer for eight years of active duty including five during World War II, two of which were aboard the aircraft...

  • Treason is treason
    Treason is treason

    There is only one word to describe the behavior of an American citizen who provides "aid and comfort" to the enemy — it's treason ("Girls' alleged attempt to go to Syria worries some," Oct. 23). I've no idea what the federal statutes are today, but in the past the penalty was a death....

  • The U.N. must coordinate the fight against the Islamic State
    The U.N. must coordinate the fight against the Islamic State

    Sectarian violence is tearing apart much of the Middle East. One of the major antagonists, the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) is also becoming a serious domestic security challenge for more than 80 countries around the world grappling with concerns about foreign terrorist...

  • Obama should attack ISIS
    Obama should attack ISIS

    As a veteran of World War II who served five years in the Pacific almost three of which were aboard the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise and later recalled for three more years during the Korean War, in my opinion President Barack Obama is absolutely not defending the safety of our citizens...

  • Obama ended the Iraq war, which was what voters elected him to do
    Obama ended the Iraq war, which was what voters elected him to do

    In response to reader Jay Hilgartner's letter, Bud Adams asserts that the "disaster of nation building in Iraq" occurred when President Obama removed all U.S. troops from the country in 2011, against the advice of his military advisers and at a time when the country was calm and stable...

  • Why must media use the term ISIS?
    Why must media use the term ISIS?

    I was elated to see the article, "U.S.: Airstrikes in Syria, Iraq change Islamic State tactics" (Oct. 18), use the same terminology as President Barack Obama when referring to the Islamic State that we are currently combating. I wish I could say the same for the media. Prominent anchors and...

  • Could ISIS pull off another 9/11?
    Could ISIS pull off another 9/11?

    I remember 9/11 as if it were yesterday, when the U.S. was struck in New York and Washington by well-laid plans hatched in Afghanistan.

Comments
Loading