The Hidden Faces of Evil

Background: the shameless acts of a slave trader 

Recently the news about the ISIS leader “Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi” surfaced on the internet, after his wives and daughter gave an interview on Al-Arabiya. Al-Baghdadi has allegedly been killed in a US operation in northwestern Syria in 2019, however, during his time as an IS fighter, he has held more than 10 Ezidi children and women as slaves in his household. According to the narratives of the wives and his daughter; the Ezidi girls and women were treated “well”.  This is a concerning statement which Ezidi Times finds crucial to address. 

What is a slave according to international law?

Slavery and its prohibition are regulated in several international instruments. In Article 1 of the Slavery Convention from 1927, “slavery is the status or condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised”. Article 2 of the Slavery Convention defines slave trade as “all acts involved in the capture, acquisition or disposal of a person with intent to reduce him to slavery; all acts involved in the acquisition of a slave with a view to selling or exchanging him; all acts of disposal by sale or exchange of a slave acquired with a view to being sold or exchanged, and, in general, every act of trade or transport in slaves”. 

Article 4 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.” The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not only relevant for the States which ratified it. It is also relevant since it reflects customary international law and the idea that all humans enjoy universal human rights, regardless of anything. 

Interview with Al-Arabiya

The fact that Ezidis have been subjected to genocide and crimes against humanity is undeniable. Thousands of Ezidi girls and women have seen how their family members have been killed in the cruelest way imaginable, they have been separated from their families and sold as objects. They have been distributed like objects among the IS-fighters and other Islamists. Yet, in the interview with Al-Arabiya the discussion is moving towards having “treated the victims well”. What well treatment could ever compensate the fact that a human being has been put in slavery? Are the family members of “al-Baghdadi” trying to defend and justify his actions or are they simply also victims who suffer from the Stockholm Syndrome? 

Regardless of how many wives a Muslim man has the right to have, how can these fellow women ever justify the fact that girls the age of their own daughters are being raped by their husbands? How and what audacity do these women have to even talk about the well treatment of the Ezidi victims? 

Why is this problematic?

Although humans have the right to express their thoughts and these interviews form an important part of understanding the situation, it is also worrisome that the Ezidi survivors have to address allegations made by al-Baghdadi’s daughter and wives regarding their “well” treatment during captivity. It is not enough that these women have been tortured, raped, and held in captivity for years, they also have to hear the thoughtless statements and allegations about being treated “well”. What logic is this? Who has given the right to the al-Baghdadi’s daughter and wives to determine whether the victims have been treated well or not? The bigger question is, how do they not feel ashamed making these statements as fellow women and human beings?

What makes the situation problematic is the fact that victims have to defend and justify their position. The Iraqi government shouldn’t have allowed these co-perpetrators (because the wives and daughter of al-Baghdadi are co-perpetrators) to roam free with no prosecution, let alone give interviews on TV. The situation can correctly be described as anarchical; perpetrators aren’t prosecuted; instead, they are trying to win global understanding and justification for their crimes, and they put victims in a vulnerable position as the victims have to re-clarify why the actions of the perpetrators are or were wrong. In other words, the situation shows that there is no legal system in Iraq and that it is the public sentiments which determine the criminal liability of the perpetrators. 

Rethink the role of the female (co) perpetrators

Women have always been given the passive and helpless role in the genocide narratives. The wives of the Nazis did not know what their husbands were doing at the scary smelling factories were millions of Jews were being burned each day and the wives of the “standard” war criminals haven’t had any knowledge about what their husbands were doing in the war fields. At least so we thought. Yet, the IS and the developments from the last decade are showing a totally different narrative. Women are criminals too, and quite evil ones. 

It is evident that the standard IS-wife is not simply a “well behaving”, innocent and “vulnerable housewives” which simply had no choice but to follow the order of their husbands. On the contrary, if anything, the biggest lesson from IS, is that women can and have in fact played a huge role in the crimes of IS. The IS-women have aided, abetted, encouraged, and supported their men into committing these cruel acts. Just this week, the German Federal Court of Bayern denied the appeal of a “IS-wife” Jennifer W and her original sentence of 14 years of imprisonment remains for membership of a terrorist organization abroad, aiding and abetting attempted murder, attempted war crimes and crimes against humanity. 

Women should not be viewed as innocent and powerless actors; just look at how the females in the al-Baghdadi household are defending the actions of a man who “married” a 13-year-old child. If the Ezidi survivors have to deny being well treated during captivity, then al-Baghdadis wives now have to respond to this: 

What were you doing when your husband was raping children? Or do you think it was fine because the children were treated well?