|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Western Vigilantes going to Iraq to Fight ISIS
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
So now we have a new kind of Western vigilante going to Iraq to fight, this time with a Christian militia against ISIS.
http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2015/02/15/westerners-join-iraqi-christian-militia-to-fight-islamic-state/
Is this legal? If so, should Western governments be discouraging it? Doesn't this seem to be giving ISIS exactly what they want by putting Western troops on the ground against them, which not only lets them talk about "Crusaders" for propaganda, but also makes them think that their apocalyptic prophesies about the "armies of Rome"? (Note: not a prophesy most modern Muslims believe in, especially not in this way).
For more on one person's opinion of what ISIS wants (and how their ideology has roots in historical Islam, especially Salafist obsession since the 1800s with imitating the behavior of the Prophet and his early followers (in the 7th and 8th centuries)...and with ISIS' preoccupation with apocalyptic prophesies, I found this article interesting (although the article's comments on the relative "safety" of Christians paying the jizya tax under ISIS dominion seem ironic given the recent beheadings of Egyptian Copt captives in Libya)...
http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
I'm waiting to see if Western governments treat these radicalised young men differently to their approach to radicalised Muslims.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
Is this legal?
Well, that might depend on your home country. However, I know that there's been some unease about this here in Australia.
Laws were introduced that basically said you had to justify why you went to certain patches of Syria (and maybe Iraq as well?), or you could be in some kind of trouble.
These laws were definitely aimed at discouraging Australians from joining ISIS, but then there was a story about a person with a little bit of a political profile who went to join a Kurdish militia. There was some debate about whether he would be caught by the laws, because I don't think anything clearly said you're in trouble for joining one side of the conflict.
I don't remember hearing about a final conclusion/outcome, and I think the man might still be over there.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bostonman
Shipmate
# 17108
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I'm waiting to see if Western governments treat these radicalised young men differently to their approach to radicalised Muslims.
Of course they will, and they should. People joining ISIS are publicly committing themselves to an apocalyptic war against all non-ISIS people, Muslim "apostates" or non-Muslim "crusaders" and "pagans" and "Zionists." People joining the peshmerga or Dwekh Nawsha or the YPG (if I'm recalling the Syrian Syriac militia correctly) are fighting to defend religious and ethnic minorities whom their governments also support. The former are ideologically opposed to Western governments, the latter supporting their foreign policy. Of course they'll be treated differently.
Posts: 424 | From: USA | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Palimpsest
Shipmate
# 16772
|
Posted
Probably legal, if a bad idea. I'm sure there will be some high profile case when one of them gets captured by ISIS and their family wants the US to rescue them.
It does remind me of the "premature anti-fascists" in the Spanish Civil War.
[ 18. February 2015, 03:05: Message edited by: Palimpsest ]
Posts: 2990 | From: Seattle WA. US | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I'm waiting to see if Western governments treat these radicalised young men differently to their approach to radicalised Muslims.
What makes you call these young men "radicalized"?
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Fighting on the side of the oppressed has a history.
In any case, I'm not clear what crime has been committed which would be sufficient to take away from them their freedoms to travel. I appreciate this argument may also be used in considering the intentions of the pro-IS "radicalised" and I have no problems about it being used that way.
I suppose one might argue about the wisdom and prudence, as opposed to the idealism, of those who want to take up arms on behalf of others they perceive as oppressed. But that is a matter of personal choice as the law stands. We are not formally at war with IS and there are no laws of internment in force against those perceived to support "the enemy". Taking away basic freedoms is a serious matter.
The quote which forms the title of Hemingway's famous book also needs to be born in mind. Whatever its justifications to itself, IS is vile and oppressive in its actions against those who live in or work in the territory it controls. As we have had almost daily proof.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
There have always been substantial numbers of Westerners, often former soldiers, working for "private security" companies in many parts of the world, including Iraq. Does it make much difference if people use the training and experience gained in Western military for pay or not?
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bostonman:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I'm waiting to see if Western governments treat these radicalised young men differently to their approach to radicalised Muslims.
Of course they will, and they should.
I'm not too sure that they automatically should be treated differently. There are a number of reasons people could be going there - not all of them honourable. The last thing we need is more sociopaths with grievances, of whatever stripe, coming back to the West with combat training and PTSD, whether or not they served as useful idiots.
The US Army has in the past taken steps against attempts by white supremacists to infiltrate it's ranks - any volunteer group is going to be rather less stringent in scrutinising applicants.
[ 18. February 2015, 09:26: Message edited by: chris stiles ]
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
Bear in mind that a major source of the Taliban/Al Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan were people who were on 'our side' against the Soviets in the 1980s.
The factors/sources are not exactly the same, I grant you, but there is a similarity is that it was people who were willing to travel a long way for a fight. And eventually it turned out they were fighting with us against a common enemy, rather than being wholly our friends.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I'm waiting to see if Western governments treat these radicalised young men differently to their approach to radicalised Muslims.
What makes you call these young men "radicalized"?
I've read a few quotes and they appear idealistic in their desire to fight against ISIS, pretty much as those who leave Western countries to fight with ISIS do. Different ideals I grant you, but the same fervour.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
Personally I can't see moral equivalence between wanting to fight for ISIS and wanting to fight to stop ISIS. I'm not a pacifist, but I suspect that many pacifists would also make a distinction.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Most people don't seem to be aware of the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870. Its date would imply that it was rushed through to stop bored young men looking for a fight from going to join the French or the Prussians. It seriously needs updating though - probably not that difficult to do - to tighten its effect, make offences easier to prove and to extend its application to enlisting in armies of entities that aren't states.
It hasn't unfortunately been invoked very often. I don't think anyone was prosecuted under it for going to Spain in 1936. There were references to it in 1967 to discourage people going to join the Six Day War, but if they had wanted to, it would have been over before they got there.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
The Canadian government does not seem to know about our Foreign Enlistment Act if one is to take ministerial statements seriously, and clearly any Canadians heading off in that direction would be in violation therefrom.
Not that Isis forces seem terribly focussed on protections for prisoners of war, but the Geneva Convention only applies fitfully to informal militias or franc-tireurs and usually not in a good way (i.e., they should not be executed arbitrarily or en masse).
Apologies for the url mess. I've tried a few times but it's not fixing.
[Think I've fixed it - B62]
[ 18. February 2015, 16:47: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
I must admit I didn't know about those bits of legislation. What strikes me is that they are probably only enforceable on return, if the departing individual doesn't declare an open interest in advance, say that's the reason they are going to a particular country/region.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
stonespring
Shipmate
# 15530
|
Posted
In the case of fighting with the Kurdish militia known as the YPG (?), there is the problem with the group's connection with the PKK, listed as a terrorist group by Western governments. Freedom fighters (even the ones with much nicer ideologies and tactics than IS) are often willing to let the ends justify the means at some point or other, and often have at least some government that considers them terrorists (that may or may not be a Western ally or an evil regime like Assad's). Songs like "Fernando" might glorify those who went to fight against Franco's troops in the Spanish Civil War, but large-scale atrocities were committed by the Republican troops in that war (the so-called good guys) and by the various left-wing paramilitary groups. I am not happy that Franco won and his regime was evil, but if the Republicans had won Spain could have become a murderous dictatorship just of a different ideological kind.
I don't know if this kind of volunteering should be illegal - you can always pull Godwin's Law and say what about the Nazi's? If your country was neutral in WWII wouldn't it be virtuous (and shouldn't it be legal) for you to go join an allied army? However, this is more like joining partisans fighting in Nazi-occupied territory - and some of the partisan groups in Europe were pretty bent on bloody communist revolution.
The point is when you enter the chain of command of any armed group aside from your country's military (and therefore have to pledge a good degree of loyalty to it), you run the risk of being involved in activities that betray your own country's laws and ideals and possibly those of the international community as well. Picking the good guys is often harder than knowing who the bad guys are.
Posts: 1537 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
From a very quick skim read of both those Foreign Enlistment Acts, I suspect one problem with their application to the present case is that the Islamic State isn't recognised as a state.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
In my country, various people were punished for having fought with ISIS. I can understand a bit where this is coming from and I'm definitely not a lawyer, but I have doubts about the juridical basis for this. I assume that there are Dutch people fighting on different sides in various conflicts all over the world. It seems extremely difficult to me to draw the line which of those would be punishable.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Different ideals I grant you, but the same fervour.
I think it's the content of the ideals that makes the radical, though. An idealistic and fervent belief in equal rights, for example, isn't "radical" in modern terms, but would have been radical indeed in times past.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
From a very quick skim read of both those Foreign Enlistment Acts, I suspect one problem with their application to the present case is that the Islamic State isn't recognised as a state.
For the Canadian Act, ISIS does not need to be a recognized state. The definitions section reads:
quote:
“foreign state” includes any foreign prince, colony, province or part of any province or people, or any person or persons exercising or assuming to exercise the powers of government in or over any foreign country, colony, province or part of any province or people;
This was a point I made in my former RL during the Yugoslav wars when a federal QC went (to quote our undergraduate intern) "like totally apeshit" when I contradicted her when she said it did not apply to a civil war. After all, it was written too apply to a civil war (Spain's).
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
Personally I can't see moral equivalence between wanting to fight for ISIS and wanting to fight to stop ISIS.
Then I don't think you are considering all possibilities.
In 2008 a DoJ study found that 50% of right-wing extremists had military experience of some kind. This led to a number of initiatives in the US Army to spot attempts by gang members to get into the army in order to learn combat.
Someone who wants to go over to Iraq may want to fight ISIS for humanitarian reasons, they may also just want to learn to shoot weapons, experience combat or just "slot a few Arabs".
This is where the distinction between regular and irregular forces makes a difference - most western armies will have initiatives to try and spot extremists in their ranks, A Random Militia Group will not, and may not care anyway.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Different ideals I grant you, but the same fervour.
I think it's the content of the ideals that makes the radical, though. An idealistic and fervent belief in equal rights, for example, isn't "radical" in modern terms, but would have been radical indeed in times past.
If we consider the content of the ideals then we have arrived at the point where one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Most people don't seem to be aware of the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870. Its date would imply that it was rushed through to stop bored young men looking for a fight from going to join the French or the Prussians. It seriously needs updating though - probably not that difficult to do - to tighten its effect, make offences easier to prove and to extend its application to enlisting in armies of entities that aren't states.
It hasn't unfortunately been invoked very often. I don't think anyone was prosecuted under it for going to Spain in 1936.
According to
"Homage to Caledonia" no-one was prosecuted under the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870, but 125 volunteers who were going to go to Spain as part of the Independent Labour Party didn't go, as the Foreign Enlistment Act was invoked after they were recruited, but before they set off.
Some men were questioned and fingerprinted under the Act on their return, but none were prosecuted.
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
In my country, various people were punished for having fought with ISIS. I can understand a bit where this is coming from and I'm definitely not a lawyer, but I have doubts about the juridical basis for this. I assume that there are Dutch people fighting on different sides in various conflicts all over the world. It seems extremely difficult to me to draw the line which of those would be punishable.
Given that one of ISIL's stated goals is to impose a form of governance upon the world which would completely erase the way the Dutch now live, I'd say the Dutch government seems to be reacting in a reasonable way.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Fr Weber: Given that one of ISIL's stated goals is to impose a form of governance upon the world which would completely erase the way the Dutch now live, I'd say the Dutch government seems to be reacting in a reasonable way.
Reasonable perhaps (I already said so much), but I'm not sure where you'd draw the juridical line. It is a crime to fight with a group that commits atrocities? In many conflicts, all sides do (including our allies). It is a crime to fight with a group that is officially on the other side than the Netherlands? Allegiances change, see the YPG/PKK. Where would the legal line be drawn?
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
Someone who wants to go over to Iraq may want to fight ISIS for humanitarian reasons, they may also just want to learn to shoot weapons, experience combat or just "slot a few Arabs".
You are right, I had only considered the first of those options. At least there is a possibility of the first option, whereas someone going to fight with ISIS doesn't leave much room for doubt.
I suppose the truth is that in a war an irregular militia is not going to care very much what the motives are - they will take whatever help they can get, and even the regular armies in that situation are not going to be a disciplined as one might like.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
In my country, various people were punished for having fought with ISIS. I can understand a bit where this is coming from and I'm definitely not a lawyer, but I have doubts about the juridical basis for this. I assume that there are Dutch people fighting on different sides in various conflicts all over the world. It seems extremely difficult to me to draw the line which of those would be punishable.
Given that one of ISIL's stated goals is to impose a form of governance upon the world which would completely erase the way the Dutch now live, I'd say the Dutch government seems to be reacting in a reasonable way.
Rule of law has to do with what has been written down, not what seems like a good idea.
Terribly inconvenient at times (very frequently to my clients) but true.
You cannot legitimately punish people for 'crimes' that aren't on the books. Just in the last few days the American conviction of an Australian citizen, David Hicks, for crimes to do with fighting with the Taliban in Afghanistan circa 9/11 has finally been overturned. Because what he did at the time, however stupid or foolish or morally wrong or however you want to describe it, was NOT a crime known to law.
[ 20. February 2015, 06:50: Message edited by: orfeo ]
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Invictus_88
Shipmate
# 15352
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
Is this legal?
It's not really my field, but I did read that a Dutch government official explicitly refused to condemn some bikers who had returned to Holland from fighting with the Kurdish forces (not the PPK).
If I remember correctly, the perceived difference was that the Peshmerga are not a forbidden organization, whereas IS are.
Posts: 206 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Invictus_88:
quote:
Originally posted by stonespring:
Is this legal?
It's not really my field, but I did read that a Dutch government official explicitly refused to condemn some bikers who had returned to Holland from fighting with the Kurdish forces (not the PPK).
If I remember correctly, the perceived difference was that the Peshmerga are not a forbidden organization, whereas IS are.
I see. It therefore looks like the Dutch government isn't interested in what one does, but who one does it for and to. Can't fault the Dutch government in particular, most work that way, but it doesn't look remotely like justice or any part of an ethical foreign policy.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Invictus_88
Shipmate
# 15352
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I see. It therefore looks like the Dutch government isn't interested in what one does, but who one does it for and to.
...are you absolutely confident that the distinction is not relevant?
Posts: 206 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Invictus_88
Shipmate
# 15352
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Invictus_88:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I see. It therefore looks like the Dutch government isn't interested in what one does, but who one does it for and to.
...are you absolutely confident that the distinction is not relevant?
Even if who one supports is not relevant (and it is), the Peshmerga have not been burning people in cages, hurling people from rooftops, and beheading religious minorities.
Posts: 206 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lord Jestocost
Shipmate
# 12909
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
According to
"Homage to Caledonia" no-one was prosecuted under the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870, but 125 volunteers who were going to go to Spain as part of the Independent Labour Party didn't go, as the Foreign Enlistment Act was invoked after they were recruited, but before they set off.
Some men were questioned and fingerprinted under the Act on their return, but none were prosecuted.
And we didn't exactly say no a couple of years later to those Irish, Americans and other official non-combatants who came over to help us fight Germany.
Posts: 761 | From: The Instrumentality of Man | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
It doesn't necessarily need to be about the Netherlands, but I would be interested in how this works juridically. I guess the easiest way would be to compile a lists of organisations that are verboten, but I can see all kinds of problems with that. Allegiances shift, some organisations make the list for dubious reasons, our official 'allies' commit atrocities from time to time ... It has the potential of becoming rather arbitrary very fast.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
There are a limited set of options:
1. Anyone may serve in any capacity overseas, for any military or militia, without restrictions
2. Anyone may serve in any capacity overseas, for any military or militia, excluding a set of named proscribed organisations
3. Anyone may serve in any capacity overseas, for any military or militia, but would face prosecution if found to have participated in any war crimes
4. No one can serve in any capacity in any overseas military or militia.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
molopata
The Ship's jack
# 9933
|
Posted
I would opt for position 4 at least for what concerns militia. If we are talking about a militia or irregular army (legally, I would assume that the Peshmerga and IS forces would fall under these definitions), the distinction of enlisting with them is not categorically different from, say, joining the Camorra, even if the Peshmerga currently agrees with our political goals.
Letting our citizens (and with that I mean particularly Europeans of the indigene type) participate in foreign, unregulated conflicts on a private basis is likely to cause huge collateral damage to our reputation, as they ignorantly or even wilfully make mistakes and commit war crimes against civilians. It has been bad enough with our regular armies in the Middle East. The last thing the West can afford are its unbridled fanatics unleashed on the region and our governments demonstrably seen to stand back from punishing them or at least trying to stop them.
--------------------
... The Respectable
Posts: 1718 | From: the abode of my w@ndering mind | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
