INTRODUCTION

1.       The APPG on Trafficked Britons in Syria is pleased to submit this evidence to the Foreign Affairs Committee’s inquiry into the United Kingdom’s engagement with the Middle East and North Africa. This submission addresses two questions of the terms of reference laid out by the inquiry:

• What are the prospects for the UK’s cooperation with allies such as the US and France in MENA? And for working with international organisations?
• What are the key challenges facing the countries of the Middle East and North Africa in the medium and long term and what implications do these have for UK foreign policy?

2.       One of the key challenges facing countries of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) is the ongoing, brutal conflict in Syria. Unfortunately, the UK’s policy regarding the unlawful, indefinite detention of thousands of individuals in North East Syria (NES) is an obstacle to a resolution of that conflict and the creation of lasting peace and stability in the region.

3.       The UK’s refusal to repatriate the small number of British nationals who are detained in NES is badly out of step with key allies and therefore undermines the UK’s ability to successfully cooperate with these allies on shared challenges arising from the conflict in Syria. It is also harming the UK’s standing and credibility in international forums. The UK’s failure to repatriate its nationals while funding detention facilities unlawfully holding thousands of prisoners, the vast majority of whom are children, actively undermines regional recovery from conflict, feeds ongoing violence and risks a resurgence of ISIS, and prevents accountability for ISIS crimes.

4.       The APPG calls on the Committee to recommend that the Government repatriate all British nationals (and former nationals) from NES, so that their cases may be resolved in the UK, including through prosecution wherever there are charges to answer.

BRITISH NATIONALS UNLAWFULLY HELD IN DETENTION FACILITIES IN NES

5.       There are around 25 British families detained in NES, with the majority of the detainees being children. The vast majority of those British children are under 10 years old.[1] British nationals make up a miniscule portion of approximately 62,000 people who are unlawfully and indefinitely detained in NES for suspected association with ISIS, held by the AANES and the SDF.[2] Women and children are held in two open-air internment camps, while male detainees are detained incommunicado in around two dozen prisons.[3]

6.       After a months-long inquiry, the APPG concluded that British nationals, including children, were trafficked by ISIS to and within Syria and Iraq.[4] Evidence submitted to the APPG indicates that at least 63 percent of British women now detained in NES may have been trafficked .[5] Our inquiry heard detailed evidence illustrating the ways in which ISIS functioned as a sophisticated trafficking operation. We heard how girls and women in particular were targeted and taken to Syria by coercive means, and once there were subjected to sexual exploitation, forced marriage, and other forms of exploitation.[6]

7.       While the FCDO has offered to bring back “unaccompanied” or “orphaned” British children, it has refused to repatriate full British families.[7] Moreover, the APPG has found that the Government “appears to have adopted a blanket policy of citizenship stripping in respect of any individuals who travelled to Syria”, including potential trafficking victims.[8] The UK Government has also  supported status quo in NES by funding detention facilities. The United Nations (UN) has reported that the UK has provided some $20 million to a prison where British boys may be detained.[9] 

8.       The UK’s non-repatriation policy results in the unlawful punishment of children. There is no apparent legal basis for their detention, as they are held merely on the basis of a presumption that their parents or caregivers are affiliated with ISIS. This is an egregious form of arbitrary detention[10] and constitutes collective punishment,[11]  a “clear breach” of international law,[12] and a war crime.[13]

DAMAGE TO THE UK’S COOPERATION WITH KEY ALLIES

9.       The UK Government’s refusal to repatriate has made Britain an outlier while our closest allies, including the United States, Australia, Canada, France, and Germany, accept the necessity of repatriations and in many cases have urged the UK to do the same. Some 40 countries have conducted repatriations,[14] with a surge of repatriations in the last two years. In 2022, there was a 60 percent increase in repatriation as compared to 2021, and an 84 percent increase compared to 2020.[15] In 2023, more than a thousand people were repatriated to over a dozen states between 1 January and 30 June.[16]

10.   The US Government has called multiple times for Britain to repatriate their nationals, in line with efforts by the Global Coalition Against Daesh to prevent further conflict in the region. Representatives of the US have said that they are “frustrated” with the UK’s failure to take back its detainees and their families.[17] At a recent Coalition meeting, the US Secretary of State Anthony J. Blinken stated that repatriations from NES are the “only durable solution” for national and global security.[18]

11.   More broadly, the UK’s stance has damaged long-standing security relationships with its closest allies. As the Foreign Affairs Committee recently heard from Paul Jordan, Head of Responding to Violent Extremism at European Institute of Peace, the UK is now being excluded from strategic discussions among security allies, with countries asking:  “Why are you inviting the Brits to this? They are so misaligned in what they are doing and what they are telling others to do.”[19]

12.   The UK is also abandoning Kurdish allies who fought against ISIS, by refusing to take accountability for Britons in the region and leaving Kurdish authorities to take responsibility for their continued detention. Kurdish authorities have asked countries to repatriate their nationals as they “cannot bear this responsibility alone.”[20] A senior Kurdish official, Elham Ahmed, remarked about the UK: “We fought with you to defeat ISIS and now you have betrayed us.”[21] The UK’s failure to heed these calls undoubtedly decreases the UK’s credibility in the MENA region and may make local allies reluctant to rely on the UK in the future.

13.   Moreover, the UK’s use of citizenship-stripping powers with respect to British nationals detained in NES is seen by allies as an abdication of responsibility. John Godfrey, then-US Coordinator for Counterterrorism and Special Envoy for the Defeat ISIS Coalition (Acting), told the APPG that the “revocation of individuals’ citizenship defers the problem and puts the burden on local partners and the international community, which has neither the mandate nor the tools needed to successfully resolve such cases.”[22] Shahzad Akbar, former Federal Minister in Pakistan, said that citizenship deprivations are “a policy of making your problem someone else’s problem.”[23] After the UK stripped citizenship from Jack Letts, former Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale said: "Canada is disappointed that the United Kingdom has taken this unilateral action to offload their responsibilities."[24]

14.   With respect to international organisations, the UK’s credibility and ability to drive its agenda is also being harmed. UN human rights entities have repeatedly found that States’ failures to repatriate their nationals is a violation of fundamental human rights.[25] Commenting on the UK’s obligations in particular, multiple UN special procedures noted that there are “positive obligations” on States to protect their citizens from “irreparable harm to their [lives] or to their physical integrity”.[26] UN Secretary-General Guterres has repeatedly asked Member States to repatriate their nationals, and recently called on Members States to “accelerate the pace of repatriation as an urgent priority.”[27] As a permanent member of the Security Council, ignoring these multiple calls to act causes serious damage to the UK’s standing and gravely undermines the UK’s ability to call on other Member States to respect human rights and international law in the MENA region and beyond.

UNSTABLE DETENTION FACILITIES UNDERMINE SECURITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS

15.   The UK’s failure to repatriate its nationals, and its financial support for the status quo in NES detention facilities, ignores the deep instability of these facilities and the risk that poses to the consolidation of peace and security in Syria and the wider region.  These facilities are under sustained threat; their collapse would present serious security risks and put thousands of detainees – many of whom are children – at grave risk of appalling human rights abuses. 

16.   There is a significant risk that the camps and prisons could simply collapse; there is no guarantee that the status quo will hold. Kurdish authorities describe the existing camps as “a ticking time bomb that could explode at any time.”[28] The prison facilities holding men are not meant to hold detainees indefinitely, and have been called a “glaring security vulnerability.”[29]

17.   There is an even greater risk of ISIS attacks on the detention facilities, which could contribute to a potential resurgence of ISIS in the region. Well-organized and coordinated attacks to free alleged fighters have already occurred. In January 2022, ISIS attacked a prison in Hasakeh which held around 850 boys as well as thousands of adult men. British and US military support was required to reinforce Kurdish forces; almost 500 people were killed in the attack.[30] The number of alleged ISIS fighters who escaped has not been made public,[31] however, the UN has reported an estimate of “between 100 and 300 fighters”.[32] Representatives of the US cite the risk of ISIS resurgence as a decisive factor for repatriations.[33]

18.   Continued detention in insecure facilities poses a significant risk of exploitation and re-trafficking of children. Danish intelligence confirmed in March 2021 that at least 30 children were kidnapped from a camp by ISIS to be “absorbed” into and “trained by” the group.[34] In May 2022, the US Treasury sanctioned five individuals who were allegedly involved in using funds “to pay for smuggling children out of the camps and delivering them to ISIS foreign fighters as potential recruits”.[35]

19.   Adolescent boys in the detention facilities are at acute risk of violence, disappearance, and death because of a policy of separation. Kurdish authorities have a practice of forcibly separating adolescent boys from their families in the camps, reportedly placing some in military detention facilities holding adult men.[36] As the UN alerted the UK in February 2022, British boys may be among those being detained in adult prisons.[37] Once separated, these boys have little to no contact with their families, and are at acute risk of violence, disappearance, and death, and face exposure to ISIS’ violent ideology.[38] One key intervention for ending this cycle of violence and conflict in the region is for the UK to repatriate all British nationals.

IMPEDING ACCOUNTABILITY AND FOSTERING IMPUNITY

20.   While the UK is vocal about the importance of justice for ISIS crimes, the existing non-repatriation policy is actively preventing accountability. The UK recently told the UN Security Council that “we stand firm in our continued international efforts to deliver justice.”[39] However, all foreign detainees, including British nationals, are held without charge or trial, and with no realistic prospect of fair trials in the region.[40] The lack of accountability risks becoming a driver of future cycles of violence and conflict.

21.   Local trials are not feasible and offer no prospect of meaningful accountability. Multiple experts told the APPG that trials in the region are untenable, impractical, and unrealistic. The US Government has said that local trials “are untenable for several reasons, including […] the absence of a viable location at which individuals can serve out their sentences in the event of successful prosecutions.”[41] The UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism has recently stated that “there is no effective possibility of proximate and fair justice in the current situations in Northeast Syria, and so the failure to repatriate, and as appropriate, apply relevant criminal justice procedures, has […] left an evident accountability gap and has undermined the human rights of victims.”[42]

22.   There is also no prospect of fair and effective justice if detainees are transferred to Iraq or Assad’s Syria to face trial, where they would be at grave risk of torture, the death penalty, and serious fair trial violations. Reporting on Iraqi trials of ISIS suspects indicate a lack of due process, with multiple cases heard and judged in under five minutes. One defendant, sentenced to death on the basis of a written confession, said: “I gave my thumbprint on a blank paper.”[43] A joint US Department of Defense and Department of State report found that in Iraq dozens of “foreign women have received death sentences for violating the counterterrorism law.”[44] The former Director of Public Prosecutions for England and Wales, Lord (Ken) Macdonald KC, told the APPG that the idea of British nationals being tried in Iraq or NES was “completely preposterous.”[45]

23.   The UK is fully capable of investigating and prosecuting returning UK nationals who may have committed crimes. Lord Macdonald told the APPG that the UK’s criminal justice system is well equipped to deal with these cases, noting that the UK has “some of the most elaborate, extensive counter-terrorism legislation in the fair trial world.”[46] Other governments have successfully investigated and prosecuted repatriated nationals, including the US, which has offered support to other countries on the matter of repatriation and prosecution.[47]

24.   In continuing to outsource the problem to a non-state actor, the UK is fostering impunity for ISIS-linked crimes. The prosecution of any potential offences can only happen after the repatriation of British nationals. The UK’s current policy is failing to disrupt the cycle of violence and conflict in NES, which leaves the UK in a position of actively undermining post-conflict transitional justice in the region.

CONCLUSION

25.   The ongoing conflict in Syria, and its grave security and humanitarian ramifications, presents significant challenges for British foreign policy in the region. This unstable situation is exacerbated by the situation in Kurdish-run detention facilities, which are on the brink of collapse and present serious security and human rights risks. By failing to take responsibility for its own nationals in NES, the UK is undermining its relationships with key security allies, neglecting efforts to prevent a resurgence of ISIS, and impeding efforts to secure accountability for ISIS crimes. The APPG recommends that the UK Government urgently repatriate British nationals held in NES, and work with allies to ensure a just resolution to the cases of those who remain unlawfully detained in these facilities.

REFERENCES