Published By ... With the Arab Spring having sprung, what is the international community’s responsibility to act when violence, internal to a state, claims innocent civilian lives? 

The question was answered by the UN even before the dawning of the Arab Spring. 

In 1994, within a 100 day period, an estimated 20% of Rwanda’s population was massacred— preplanned by government leaders who sanctioned special militia units to undertake the killings. Despite the presence of a UN peacekeeping force at the time, genocide occurred due to, among other things, a vague mission mandate forbidding intervention in Rwanda’s internal politics, absent genocide. 

But when peacekeepers then sought authorization to act, it was not given.

By the close of the 20th century, combined regrets over humanitarian inaction in Rwanda and action in Somalia, where US casualties were incurred, provoked UN debate over the international community’s obligation to intervene during such humanitarian crises.    

As a result, in 2006, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) endorsed the “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) doctrine as a set of principles by which to stop genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing. R2P’s reasoning is, while sovereignty remains a state right, the state also has a responsibility to protect its people which, failing to do so, then falls to the international community.

Since R2P’s adoption, consideration of its exercise has proven worthy in at least three Middle East crises.  

In 2011, Libyan strongman Muamar Gaddafi promised to stamp out the “rats” opposing his rule, and then proceeded to do so. Adopting an R2P resolution, the UN Security Council (UNSC) noted Libya’s actions against its civilians may constitute “crimes against humanity,” authorizing certain UN actions, including military force if necessary. 

 Military action became necessary to level the playing field by minimizing the Libyan military’s ability to massacre civilians, allowing Libyans then to resolve things amongst themselves. That resolution came with Gaddafi’s death. 

Also in 2011, the Syrian people took to the streets demonstrating against a dictator, Bashar Assad, who showed no quarter. Fifteen months later, the slaughter continues. 

 As Syria’s death count approaches 10,000, the UN’s R2P sword—wielded to quell the killing in Libya—remains sheathed with China and Russia refusing to let it be drawn, allowing the death toll to mount.

In July 2009, before UNGA adopted R2P, the Iraqi army attacked Camp Ashraf—the Iraqi home for almost 25 years to Iranian opposition group Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK). Listed by the US in 1997 as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) to appease Tehran, the 3400 member-strong MEK has since undertaken actions qualifying it for removal from that status. Inexplicably, the US has yet to do so. 

MEK had voluntarily surrendered to US forces invading Iraq in 2003, yielding their weapons without a fight. Accordingly, MEK gained status as “protected persons” under the Geneva Conventions, with the US responsible for their safety as an occupying force.

The unprovoked Iraqi attack in 2009 against unarmed MEK residents left dozens of defenseless residents dead or wounded. While R2P did not become operable until two months later, yet another unprovoked attack by the Iraqis followed in April 2011, killing an additional 36 defenseless residents, including eight women.  

Note: while US forces did not depart Iraq until the end of 2011, the Iraqi attacks against MEK occurred after the US turnover of military operations to them in January 2009. Although US forces continued to provide security at Camp Ashraf through 2011 by making regular visits there while accompanying UN observers, they were mysteriously pulled back hours before the attacks, on Baghdad’s orders. 

Clearly, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki seeks to destroy MEK to carry out the will of the Iranian government, which MEK opposes. As such, Iraq will never recognize its own R2P responsibilities. Maliki, who visited Iran just last month, is now being pressured by Tehran to extradite 166 MEK members to Iran for prosecution for waging “war on god”—code for opposing the ruling mullahs. 

It is believed Maliki also met with the head of Iran’s elite military Qods Force to discuss further suppressive measures to take against MEK. Iran’s biggest fear is the Arab Spring may become a Persian one, resulting in MEK members organizing domestic opposition in Iran.  

While the R2P duty has not even been raised by the UNSC, China and Russia would undoubtedly, as they did with Syria, veto it if it were, due to close ties with Iran.    

While the US is hard-pressed to take R2P action in Syria without a UN umbrella, it does not face the same hurdle at Camp Ashraf. By accepting MEK’s surrender in 2003, the US immediately became responsible for its safety. That responsibility survived the US turnover of Camp Ashraf to the Iraqis and its subsequent withdrawal. 

If other states act to block the UN’s ability to stop the killing there of innocent civilians, the US needs to move independently and aggressively to prevent further atrocities by Tehran’s Baghdad puppet before it extradites MEK members to Iran for execution or continues executing them while still in Iraq. 

Holocaust survivor, humanitarian activist and Nobel Prize recipient Elie Wiesel has vowed never to remain silent when human atrocity rears its ugly head. Yet, as he speaks out on lives lost in both Syria and Camp Ashraf, the world remains silent, turning a blind eye to another atrocity.

By its action, Iraq has demonstrated its intentions concerning MEK run contrary to the R2P doctrine and to US responsibility ensuring MEK’s safety. By its inaction, the US not only demonstrates R2P’s non-relevance but a haunting fear of the Ghosts of Somalia Past, Iraq Present and Iran Future.