[The United States has seized on the issue, pushing for a
legally binding United Nations Security Council resolution that would compel
all countries in the world to take steps to “prevent and suppress” the flow of
their citizens into the arms of groups considered to be terrorist organizations.]
By Somini Sengupta
UNITED NATIONS — France wants more power to block its citizens from leaving the
country, while Britain is weighing whether to stop more of its citizens from
coming home. Tunisia is debating measures to make it a criminal offense to
help jihadist fighters travel to Syria and Iraq , while Russia has outlawed enlisting in armed groups that are
“contradictory to Russian policy."
A look at how governments around the world deal with their citizens who become jihadists.
Video Credit By Christian Roman on September 12, 2014 .
The rapid surge of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria , and its ability to draw fighters from across the globe,
have set off alarm bells in capitals worldwide. Countries that rarely see eye
to eye are now trying to blunt its recruitment drive, passing a raft of new
rules that they hope will stop their citizens from joining extremist groups
abroad.
The United States has seized on the issue, pushing for a
legally binding United Nations Security Council resolution that would compel
all countries in the world to take steps to “prevent and suppress” the flow of
their citizens into the arms of groups considered to be terrorist
organizations.
Recruits from 74 countries are among the estimated 12,000
foreign militants in Syria and Iraq , many of them fighting with ISIS ,
according to Peter Neumann, a professor at King’s College London, who has
culled the figures largely from government sources.
The largest blocs of these fighters come from nearby Muslim countries, like
Tunisia and Saudi Arabia, but smaller contingents come from countries as far
away and disparate as Belgium, China, Russia and the United States.
American intelligence officials disclosed this week that
there were 15,000 foreign fighters in Iraq and Syria from 80 countries, mostly with ISIS .
The Security Council made it illegal to aid terrorist organizations
after the Sept. 11 attacks, and recent
studies suggest that
only a small share of foreign fighters have committed acts of terrorism once
they return home. But the prospect of radicalized youths’ becoming hardened on
the battlefields of Syria and Iraq has sent a new ripple of anxiety through nations of all
stripes, reviving a longstanding tension, especially in democratic countries,
over how to balance civil liberties and security in an age of transnational
terrorism.
“You now have reopened those
very debates,” said Kathleen Hicks, a former Pentagon official now at the
Center for Strategic and International Studies.
The efforts to stop fighters from rallying to the side of
ISIS puts the greatest scrutiny on countries like Turkey, whose long porous
border has allowed thousands of militants to cross into the Syrian battlefield
and into Iraq. Turkey has openly supported some of the rebels who have sought
to unseat Syria ’s president, Bashar al-Assad, but lately it has faced
the direct ire of ISIS . Nearly 50 of its citizens have been held hostage by the
group in the Iraqi city of Mosul since June, including the Turkish consul general.
“It’s not a blame game,” said
Yasar Halit Cevik, the Turkish ambassador to the United Nations. “We’re all in
the same boat. Turkey feels like it’s in the same boat as the moderate
international community.”
The focus on foreign fighters also shines the spotlight
on Qatar , which has had strong ties to several militant groups
seeking to topple Mr. Assad in Syria , and on Saudi Arabia , home to powerful religious leaders who have long
sanctioned jihad. The Saudi king this year issued a rare decree making it a
criminal offense to join a foreign war. It signaled his concerns about the
threat that extremist groups could pose to his hold on power, but the degree to
which he can reign in radical preachers in his kingdom remains to be seen.
The debate over stemming the flow of foreign fighters has
opened up new legal territory and raised the question of when and how countries
should prosecute their citizens for fighting in another country’s war. Beyond
that, standards of proof can be high in many European countries, diplomats
said, and proving participation in a known terrorist group has been a
challenge.
What is more, governments around the world are under
pressure to balance their desire to target individuals who pose a genuine risk
at home without engaging in broad crackdowns that could backfire and alienate a
wider portion of their populations, particularly Muslim youths.
“It requires very, very rigorous intelligence
assessment,” said David H. Ucko, an associate professor at the National
Defense University in Washington . “If you let in the wrong person and you have an attack,
the political blowback is going to be unbelievable.”
Take
for instance, the case of Mehdi Nemmouche, a French citizen suspected of
killing four people at the Jewish Museum in Brussels this year. A French journalist held hostage for months
by extremists in Syria has said that Mr. Nemmouche was one of his captors, the
newspaper Le Point reported.
The call for a new global legal apparatus echoes a raft
of counterterrorism provisions passed in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks. The
United Nations Security Council already prohibits aiding organizations that are
on its own list of banned groups, including Al Qaeda and its Syrian affiliate,
the Nusra Front, though not other groups like Hezbollah, which the United States considers to be a terrorist group.
There are also long no-fly
lists in circulation already. Passports can be confiscated. Children can be
taken into state custody. And many countries, including some in Europe ,
have already prosecuted terrorism suspects under existing laws.
French law currently requires
a court order to stop a citizen from leaving the country to go abroad. The
government is weighing new rules that would enable the police to make that
decision without judicial review.
Germany, which can already revoke passports in certain
cases, is considering a provision enabling it to revoke the national identity
cards that all Germans are issued, which allow them to travel to many
countries, including Turkey.
The Netherlands recently proposed amending its nationality laws to be
able to revoke Dutch citizenship if a person has volunteered with a terrorist
organization. This would apply only to dual citizens, according to the Dutch
Foreign Ministry. Already, various administrative measures are available to the
Dutch authorities, and the police recently detained two couples from the small
town of Huizen and took their children into state custody. The
authorities said they were suspected of going to Syria to join a terrorist group.
In Tunisia , where Parliament is debating a new antiterrorism law,
the government estimates that 2,400 Tunisians went to fight in Syria , mainly with ISIS and the Nusra Front. A Tunisian
diplomat said his country had prevented an additional 8,000 from traveling to Syria .
The American-sponsored resolution will be voted on at a
Security Council meeting led by President Obama on Sept 24. The day before,
Secretary of State John Kerry is scheduled to lead a meeting of counterterrorism
officials from around the world to discuss how to deal with foreign fighters
more effectively. Counterterrorism officials recommend that countries share
data to detect the recruitment of foreign fighters, monitor online
communications more aggressively, share airline passenger information in
advance, and criminalize travel abroad to fight.
Ms. Hicks, the former Pentagon official, described the
American push as a low-cost diplomatic effort to rally support for the fight
against ISIS without having to do anything extra, like committing
troops. She called it “an easy way for countries to sign up and say they’re
part of this strategy.”
It is virtually impossible to enforce, experts say, and
does not authorize military action by any country. In the end, it leaves it to
every country to weigh its need to stop the fighters against other political
and strategic priorities, Mr. Ucko of the National
Defense University said.
“It starts a conversation,” he said. “It comes down to
what a state wants to do internally.”
Eric
Schmitt contributed reporting from Washington .