Repatriate British families from Al-Hol

Rob Williams is the CEO of War Child.

Four years on from the military defeat of the Islamic State (ISIS), young women and children continue to be punished for the group’s monstrous crimes.

The Al-Hol detention camp in northeast Syria is home to around 50,000 women and children who come from over 40 countries and were once associated with ISIS. Many of the camp’s detainees arrived as young girls. Some went voluntarily, some were groomed, others were compelled to join husbands or were brought to ISIS by their parents. But today, most of the camp’s current residents are young children born into the horror of war, exposed daily to violence and squalid conditions.

Faced with this reality, countries with citizens in Al-Hol, whether from America, Europe or Asia, have been gradually allowing them to be repatriated, mostly to recover their lives and, where relevant, to face justice — with few exceptions. And among the most notable countries refusing to undertake the humane repatriation of families is the United Kingdom.

When seen alongside the steps undertaken by other countries, the U.K. government’s pretext of protecting Britain from potential security threats presented by returning women and children is inexplicable. Of the 25 British families in Al-Hol, most are young children. And for a government that’s led global campaigns to end sexual violence in conflict and tackle human trafficking, the decision to leave British children languishing in a conflict zone is shocking.

Moreover, bringing these families home would not only uphold moral obligations, but it would also safeguard national and regional security.

Currently, it is growing public revulsion in the U.K. that’s driving a campaign by civil society organizations — including War Child, Reprieve and Human Rights Watch — as well as security experts and public figures, all demanding the government take action. And while the ethical case for protecting children and those who unwittingly fell under the control of ISIS is clear, the legal and security arguments are equally compelling.

For one, the detention of these families is arbitrary, unlawful and contrary to the U.K.’s human rights obligations. Not one individual at Al-Hol has yet been charged with a crime, as the families are solely being held for their presumed — yet unproven — links to ISIS. And the continued reluctance to repatriate them due to this alleged association is wholly unacceptable when there’s been no due process.

To date, the U.K. has repatriated only 10 British orphans or unaccompanied children — and by prioritizing the return of certain categories of children, the government’s perpetuating harmful distinctions between those deserving of rights and those who aren’t. The U.K. is also failing to address the circumstances of young British adults who were exploited, groomed, trafficked and coerced by ISIS, as well as those who were recruited as children.

The U.K. needs to do the right thing — for all British families at Al-Hol — and take the necessary measures to support their reintegration into society. Children deserve the opportunity to come home and rebuild their lives. And where there is a case to answer for adults, courts are more than capable of delivering justice.

Over the past year, there’s been a surge in such repatriations, reflecting a growing international consensus regarding the urgency of the current situation. The U.K.’s refusal stands in stark contrast to the actions of the 38 other countries that have already returned the majority — if not all — of their nationals at Al-Hol. For example, countries like the United States have successfully repatriated families, acknowledging both the security risks and deplorable conditions in detention camps. And they’ve also expressed readiness to assist other states with facilitating returns and supporting reintegration.

The U.K. should learn from the success stories and adopt a similar approach. Thoughtful preparation, formal risk management and collaboration with local authorities are essential to ensuring the safety, protection and reintegration of repatriated individuals — which the U.K. can do.

Children are among the most vulnerable victims in this dire situation, and the conditions in these camps are rapidly deteriorating, with inadequate access to essentials such as food, water, shelter and medical care. The U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child found that current conditions “pose an imminent risk of irreparable harm to the children’s lives, their physical and mental integrity and their development,” and there is “an imminent risk of death.” Thus, the organization recently recommended the U.K. “undertake effective and urgent measures to repatriate children who are nationals of the state party from camps in the Syrian Arab Republic.”

Of grave concern is also the separation of adolescent boys from their families. Perceived as potential security risks, many are being arbitrarily detained with no prospect of release. Just this February, boys as young as 11 were being forcibly separated from their families and moved into prisons, where they’re at heightened risk of sexual abuse, and have little to no contact with the outside world.

However, the U.K. has outsourced its responsibilities, contributing significant funding to the construction of detention facilities instead. But the fact remains that the criminalization and detention of children without trial will do nothing to address the threat posed by armed groups and serves only to increase marginalization and resentment.

Moreover, according to a public poll we conducted in April this year, 60 percent of the British public surveyed said the U.K. government has a responsibility to bring families home.

The U.K.’s failure to repatriate British families detained in northeast Syria is a stain on its human rights record, as well as the country’s responsibility to protect all its citizens. Through inaction, the U.K. not only undermines its standing among allies but is also risking its national and regional security.

Simply put, the time for justice and compassion to prevail over indifference and neglect is now.