John Kerry testifies on Capitol Hill on Feb. 24. (Photo: Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP)
Secretary
of State John Kerry signaled today that he plans to decide soon whether
to formally accuse the Islamic State of genocide amid what sources
describe as an intense debate within the Obama administration about how
such a declaration should be worded and what it might mean for U.S.
strategy against the terrorist group.
“None
of us have ever seen anything like it in our lifetimes,” Kerry said
during a House subcommittee hearing Wednesday about beheadings and
atrocities committed by the Islamic State.
But
in response to questioning by Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, a Nebraska
Republican who has been spearheading a resolution in Congress demanding
the administration invoke an international treaty against genocide,
Kerry was careful not to tip his hand on what has turned into a thorny
internal legal debate with political and potentially military
consequences.
Saying
the department was reviewing “very carefully the legal standards and
precedents” for a declaration of genocide against the Islamic State,
Kerry added that he had received “initial recommendations” on the issue
but had then asked for “further evaluations.”
In
his first public comments on the issue, Kerry said he “will make a
decision on this” as soon as he receives those evaluations. He didn’t
elaborate on when that might occur.
The administration’s plans to invoke the powerfully evocative genocide label — an extremely rare move — was first reported
by Yahoo News last November. But at the time, the State Department was
focused on restricting the designation to the Islamic State’s mass
killings, beheadings and enslavement of the Yazidis — a relatively small
minority group of about 500,000 in northern Iraq that the terrorist
group has vowed to wipe out on the grounds they are “devil worshipers.”
The
disclosure set off a strong backlash among members of Congress and
Christian groups who argued that Islamic State atrocities against Iraqi
and Syrian Christians and other smaller minority groups also deserved
the genocide label. Some conservatives even chastised the administration
for displaying a “politically correct bias that views Christians …
never as victims but always as Inquisition-style oppressors.”
The
issue has since made its way into the presidential campaign; Sen. Marco
Rubio has signed a Senate version of a House resolution, co-sponsored
by Fortenberry and Rep. Anna Eshoo, for a broader genocide designation
that incorporates Christians, Turkmen, Kurds and other groups. Hillary
Clinton has also endorsed
such as move. In response to a question from a voter at a New Hampshire
town hall last December about whether she believes Christians as well
as Yazidis should be declared victims of genocide, she said, “I will,
because we now have enough evidence.”
A
Iraqi Yazidi woman and her children took refuge at the Bajid Kandala
camp in Dohuk, Iraq, after fleeing Islamic State jihadists. (Photo:
Ahmad Al-Rubaye/AFP)
But
administration sources and others intimately familiar with the internal
debate say the issue has proven more complicated. While ISIS has openly
declared its intention of destroying the Yazidis, they argue, the
terrorist group’s leaders have not made equally explicit statements
about Christians even while committing killings, kidnappings, forced
removals and the confiscation and destruction of churches aimed at
Christian groups. As a result, administration officials and State
Department lawyers have weighed labeling those acts “crimes against
humanity” — a step that critics have said doesn’t go far enough. “We’ve
been trying to tell them, crimes against humanity are not a bronze
medal,” said one administration official, contending that it should not
be viewed as a less serious designation.
Post a Comment
Post a Comment