Don't let Zarqawi get away with genocide
By Raj Purohit and Golzar Kheiltash
The Daily Star
June 6, 2006

The recent string of attacks in Iraq by suicide bombers targeting Shiite mosques and holy shrines are the latest in an aggressive campaign orchestrated by Iraq's Al-Qaeda pointman, Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi.

For months Zarqawi has been coordinating attacks on Shiites in Iraq. Zarqawi's intent is to spark a broader sectarian conflict that could trigger a US military pullout. But something more sinister lies below: a campaign of genocide.

Genocidal intentions were apparent as far back as September 2005. On September 14, after the bloody attacks aimed at Shiites that killed 150 people, Al-Qaeda in Iraq issued a statement that declared "all-out war" against the Iraqi religious majority. Since the statement, attacks have escalated - at least 1,200 Shiites have been killed and over 1,600 have been wounded.

Zarqawi's declaration raises significant long-term concerns, for it suggests that recent violence may in fact foreshadow a widespread targeting of Shiites - and ultimately genocidal intent.

Zarqawi's contempt for Shiites has been no secret. He has, along with other members of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, repeatedly referred to Shiites as "rafidha" - i.e. rejecters of Islam. This term is particularly damning in Islam, punishable by death. In addition to declarations of all-out war, by calling Shiites rafidha, Zarqawi is culpable for dehumanization - one of eight stages of genocide identified by Greg Stanton, president of Genocide Watch.

Genocide as defined in Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide is "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group" including subpart (a), "killing members of the group." Article 3 of the Convention lists the acts that are punishable, which include "genocide; conspiracy to commit genocide and direct and public incitement to commit genocide."

At minimum, a case can be made that Zarqawi should have to defend charges of conspiracy to commit genocide and direct and public incitement to commit genocide. Zarqawi's intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a specific religious group - i.e. Shiites - has been public since September 2005.

Some policymakers, however, are cautious to do this, recognizing the specificity of the genocide charge and the relative difficulty of proving it.

Since Zarqawi is a terrorist facing numerous criminal charges if captured and tried, policymakers cite limited significance in a genocide charge. This thinking, however, does not give sufficient weight to the seriousness of genocidal intent from both a legal/political and an "on the ground" perspective.

First, it is possible that Zarqawi is receiving financial aid from external benefactors who sympathize with his ideological agenda. Donors may be given pause if confronted with the possibility of a charge of complicity in genocide. Furthermore, it is important to note that while no international definition of terrorism exists, the global community does recognize genocide as a crime against humanity.

Second, a credible charge of genocide may shift thinking within individual members of the Sunni minority. Unhappiness with the political trajectory of post-Saddam Iraq has made them reluctant to criticize or oppose Zarqawi. They may confront him more openly if they are forced to confront a campaign of ethnic cleansing against Shiites.

At minimum, the secretary general of the United Nations should authorize Juan Mendez, the UN special adviser on the prevention of genocide, to investigate - with the assistance of UN Special Representative for Iraq Ashraf Jehangir Qazi - and issue a public report with specific recommendations.

The more ideal response, however, would be to invoke international criminal law and establish an international criminal tribunal - akin to the Yugoslav and Rwanda tribunals - to try Zarqawi. Equally compelling would be the International Criminal Court, a permanent court that has explicit jurisdiction over the crime of genocide.

Raj Purohit is an attorney and senior fellow in International Law and Justice at Citizens for Global Solutions. Golzar Kheiltash is an attorney and legal analyst at Citizens for Global Solutions.

READ ON THE DAILY STAR WEBSITE