GZERO Media logo

Should ISIS fighters and families be allowed home?

Should ISIS fighters and families be allowed home?

Turkey's government has captured many thousands of ISIS fighters as a result of its operations in northern Syria. Many of these prisoners have already been deported to some of the more than 100 countries they come from, and Ankara says it intends to send more. There are also more than 10,000 women and children – family members of ISIS fighters – still living in camps inside Syria.

These facts create a dilemma for the governments of countries where the ISIS detainees are still citizens: Should these terrorist fighters and their families be allowed to return, in many cases to face trial back home? Or should countries refuse to allow them back?


Consider the best arguments from both sides…

Accept them:

  • Repatriated fighters and their families should stand trial for membership in a terrorist organization at home, and the guilty should go to jail. That's better than allowing them to remain at large.
  • Some of these ISIS fighters and their families were brainwashed. Others, particularly some of the women, were coerced to join a fight they wanted no part of. Yes, many of those who claim to be victims are lying, but it's better to allow a guilty person to return home to stand trial than to leave an innocent person to a potentially terrible fate they don't deserve.
  • Then there are the children, thousands of whom were born in Syria. They're guilty of nothing. Many of these children are sick, malnourished, and at risk of death inside overcrowded and dangerous refugee camps, which are also centers of radicalization.
  • Governments must abide by their own laws. Many of the fighters and their family members are still citizens of the countries they left, and citizens have rights. In many countries, the children of citizens are also considered citizens, even if they were born elsewhere.

Reject them:

  • A citizen who declares war on his or her own government and carries out or enables the murder of innocent people should forfeit some rights—including the right of citizenship.
  • It's true that some of these people may have been tricked or coerced into a war they didn't want, but how are courts in their countries of origin expected to separate fact from fiction.
  • It is not the responsibility of governments to rescue people from their own bad decisions.
  • Government has responsibility to protect all its citizens, not just those who chose a life of terrorism. On December 1, Usman Khan stabbed two people to death and wounded three others on London Bridge. Khan was a convicted terrorist, though not directly affiliated with ISIS, who was released after serving less than half of his 16-year prison sentence because he was judged to have been rehabilitated.

The Bottom Line: This debate will become more important in dozens of countries around the world in coming months and years, because the detention of thousands of people in camps in countries that don't want them is unsustainable.

What's the right answer? Tell us what you think.

Khant Thaw Htoo is a young engineer who works in Eni's Sakura Tower office in the heart of Yangon. As an HSE engineer, he monitors the safety and environmental impact of onshore and offshore operations. He also looks out for his parents' well-being, in keeping with Myanmar's traditions.

Learn more about Khant in the final episode of the Faces of Eni series, which focuses on Eni's employees around the world.

On his first day as president, Joe Biden signed a remarkable series of executive orders. Boom! The US rejoins the Paris Climate Accord. Bang! The United States rejoins the World Health Organization. Pow! No more ban on immigration from many Muslim-majority countries. Biden's press secretary reminded reporters later in the day that all these orders merely begin complex processes that take time, but the impact is still dramatic.

If you lead a country allied with the US, or you're simply hoping for some specific commitment or clear and credible statement of purpose from the US government, you might feel a little dizzy today. The sight of an American president (Barack Obama) signing his name, of the next president (Donald Trump) erasing that name from the same legislation/bill, and then the following president (Biden) signing it back into law again will raise deep concerns over the long-term reliability of the world's still-most-powerful nation.

More Show less

Kevin Sneader, Global Managing Partner at McKinsey & Company, provides perspective on what corporate business leaders are thinking during the global coronavirus crisis:

Should businesses be pessimistic or optimistic about 2021?

It's easy to be gloomy about the year ahead when faced with the realities of a cold, bleak winter in much of the world. Add to that lockdowns across Europe, surging case numbers and hospitalizations, and dreadful events in the Capitol in the US to name a few reasons for pessimism. But I think there is a case for optimism when it comes to this year. After all, it's true to say that it's always darkest before the dawn, and my conversations with business leaders suggest there are reasons to be positive by 2021.

More Show less

Renowned tech journalist Kara Swisher has no qualms about saying that many of the country's social media companies need to be held accountable for their negative role in our current national discourse. Swisher calls for "a less friendly relationship with tech" by the Biden administration, an "internet bill of rights" around privacy, and an investigation into antitrust issues.

Swisher, who hosts the New York Times podcast Sway, joins Ian Bremmer for the latest episode of GZERO World, airing on public television nationwide beginning this Friday, January 22th. Check local listings.

Brexit pettiness lingers: Here we were naively thinking the Brexit shenanigans were over after the EU and UK agreed to an eleventh-hour post-Brexit trade deal last month. We were wrong — the saga continues. Now, a new row has erupted after the Johnson government said it will not give the EU ambassador in London the same diplomatic status awarded to other representatives of nation states. Unsurprisingly, this announcement peeved Brussels, whose delegates enjoy full diplomatic status in at least 142 other countries. The UK says it will give the EU envoy the same privileges as those given to international organizations, which are subject to change and do not include immunity from detention and taxation given to diplomats under the Vienna Convention on diplomatic relations. EU members are furious, with officials accusing London of simply trying to flex its muscles and engaging in "petty" behavior. The two sides will discuss the matter further when UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson meets EU representatives next week, their first face-to-face since the two sides settled the Brexit quagmire on December 31. Alas, the Brexit nightmare continues.

More Show less
The GZERO World Podcast with Ian Bremmer. Listen now.

GZEROMEDIA

Subscribe to GZERO Media's Newsletter: Signal