Eurasia Press & News
In-depth: The failure to address past violations in the ‘war on terror’ has enabled UK and US-backed torture practices to re-emerge, this time in Syria.
The US and UK’s complicity in torture and detention practices has once again come under the spotlight amid revelations of the systematic abuses and preventable deaths of detainees in northeast Syria.
Following the territorial defeat of the Islamic State (IS) in Syria a harrowing system of arbitrary and indefinite detention has emerged, overseen by the region’s autonomous authorities, notably the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), key partners of the US-led coalition against IS.
According to Amnesty International, “the US government has played a central role in the creation and maintenance of this system,” while it is also funded, to a lesser extent, by the UK.
These revelations reflect how the failure to address past violations in the ‘war on terror’ – notably during heightened attention on abuses in Guantanamo Bay and Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison – has enabled US-backed torture practices to re-emerge.
"The northeast Syria detention camps increasingly look like a new Guantanamo on an enormous scale, where tens of thousands of men, women and children are indefinitely detained without charge" ‘A new Guantanamo’
Over 56,000 individuals, including roughly 11,500 men, 14,500 women, and 30,000 children, are ensnared within a sprawling network of at least 27 detention facilities and two major camps – Al-Hol and Roj.
It includes more than 20 British nationals, along with many stripped of their British citizenship – notably Shamima Begum.
Amnesty warned that this arrangement has resulted in grievous violations against detainees, including widespread torture and inhumane conditions that have led to hundreds of preventable deaths.
Many of the children are below 12, and naturally too young to be IS members, while others themselves are victims of IS.
There are limited safeguards for detainee welfare, including inadequate food and medical care, with an uptick of serious illnesses including tuberculosis – which is fatal in 50% of cases if untreated.
“The northeast Syria detention camps increasingly look like a new Guantanamo on an enormous scale, where tens of thousands of men, women and children are indefinitely detained without charge,” Maya Foa, Joint Executive Director of Reprieve, told The New Arab.
“Here we see the long shadow of the ‘war on terror’ era: the normalisation of indefinite detention and torture, justified in the name of “national security”, when in fact these practices serve neither security nor justice.”
Indeed, these camps have become notorious for their brutal and dehumanising conditions. Torture methods in these sites reportedly include severe beatings, stress positions, and electric shocks. Such measures are not isolated incidents but part of a broader, systemic practice of cruelty.
US personnel are also allegedly aware of these abuses, yet Washington has made minimal efforts to ensure safety for detainees.
“We know the Americans, they come with their weapons and their dogs… [They] checked on the prison, and they searched us, and all of our rooms… They were able to see the blood on the wall. They could see the people who were injured from torture,” one detainee told Amnesty, speaking of US forces visiting in December 2021.
Beyond the violation of basic human rights which occur under the guise of security, there are also concerns over long-term security risks.
“Ignoring the potential for radicalization among those abandoned in these camps is a serious oversight. We need to establish clear pathways for these individuals to return home safely,” Elisa Massimino, Visiting Professor of Law and Executive Director of Georgetown University Law Center’s Human Rights Institute, told The New Arab.
“Alongside the unconscionable human rights abuses, the security implications are dire if we fail to address the conditions within these hellholes,” she added.
"We see the long shadow of the 'war on terror' era: the normalisation of indefinite detention and torture, justified in the name of 'national security', when in fact these practices serve neither security nor justice" Persistent lack of accountability
Despite numerous accounts of harsh mistreatment of suspects in Guantanamo Bay following the onset of the ‘war on terror’ there remains a lack of accountability, which arguably perpetuates a culture of tolerating torture.
To date, 30 detainees remain in Guantanamo Bay, most of whom without criminal charges. US President Joe Biden has refused to heed calls from dozens of advocacy groups to close the detention camp in Cuba.
“The US continues to incarcerate and abuse the remaining CIA prisoners in Guantánamo Bay, denying them the healthcare needed to address their complex physical and mental conditions resulting from torture and incommunicado detention,” Ruth Blakeley, Professor of Politics and International Relations at the University of Sheffield, told The New Arab.
Washington “continues to seek the death penalty for a number of them even though the evidence against them was obtained through torture,” she added.
“The Amnesty report suggests few lessons have been learned about the futility of torture in addressing the terrorist threat, or the long legacy effects it has for both victims and perpetrators.”
The US is also a signatory to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, meaning it is legally obliged to remediate survivors of abuses from its government forces. Yet legal barriers have often prevented individuals seeking justice in US courts.
While Washington has infamously employed severe measures like waterboarding, sleep deprivation, stress positions, and other abusive tactics against terror suspects, the UK’s involvement in these activities was previously less well-known.
In various instances in the ‘war on terror,’ British intelligence and security personnel supplied questions and intelligence to the CIA, despite awareness of ongoing abuses. Intelligence officials were present in thousands of interrogations at Guantanamo Bay, while British forces were also responsible for the mistreatment of detainees in Basra during the Iraq invasion.
“Various UK governments have talked about their principled opposition to torture, but the reality – not least in the Middle East – has often been quite different,” Elaine van der Schaft, Amnesty International UK’s Rapid Response Campaigner, told The New Arab.
For multiple reasons, the UK has been reluctant to investigate its own role in conducting and abetting torture.
Firstly, the desire to maintain a close relationship with Washington makes it cautious about investigating its practices, as that would naturally also implicate the CIA.
Moreover, the UK has historically always tried to avoid openness about its role in torture, such as during its war against the Kenyan anti-colonial movement, the Mau Mau, in the 1950s, and the Troubles in Northern Ireland.
Indeed, like the US, there’s clearly a pattern within the UK of trying to ensure it keeps projecting a positive and pro-human rights image of its foreign policy.
"The Amnesty report suggests few lessons have been learned about the futility of torture in addressing the terrorist threat, or the long legacy effects it has for both victims and perpetrators" Growing calls for accountability
Alongside Amnesty’s revelations in northeast Syria, calls for accountability have also emerged over the treatment of individuals in Abu Ghraib.
On Monday, the US federal court began deliberations in Al Shimari et al. v. CACI in Virginia, with survivors seeking to gain compensatory and punitive damages after numerous attempts by CACI Premier Technology, which is being investigated over mistreatment, to dismiss the case since its initiation in 2008.
Plaintiffs say mistreatment included beatings, electric shocks, food deprivation and sexual assault, with guards posing for pictures while smiling with inmates in the nude with bags over their heads.
While similar lawsuits against the US government have been thwarted by a 1946 law granting immunity to US forces during wartime, this case progressed by targeting a military contractor instead.
For the UK’s part, a parliamentary debate in March centred on the investigatory powers (amendment) bill, and a new clause was discussed.
Proposed by Conservative MP David Davis, clause three aims to absolutely prohibit the transfer of information to foreign authorities where there is a potential for torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment (CIDT).
Davis expressed concern to MPs, stating, “I am afraid that, each year, we are seeing more cases in which the UK seeks to share intelligence despite a real risk of torture”.
In March 2023, Mustafa Al-Hawsawi, a Saudi citizen alleged to be aiding the hijackers behind the September 11 attacks and detained in Guantanamo Bay since 2006, brought a complaint against UK intelligence agencies for complicity in torturing him, sparking a judicial review.
Amid this mounting pressure to provide redress for the countless victims, calls for additional measures grow louder.
“There has been no adequate accountability or recompense for victims in the US or the UK, despite findings by the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the UK’s Intelligence and Security Committee that the legacy of rendition and torture has been to increase not diminish the threat from terrorism, and has eroded the moral standing of both states,” said Ruth Blakeley.
Legal pressure and advocacy groups are clearly playing a central role in pushing for accountability, while there are calls for consistent efforts to bring lasting change.
“We have the laws we need. The real challenge post-9/11 has been the lack of political will to enforce them. Ensuring these laws are upheld requires strong political leadership, something we must continuously advocate for,” said Elisa Massimino.
Alongside providing redress for victims, a real reckoning with the past is also necessary. As the continued violations in Syria show, this is not only for justice for those victims, but to ensure that such abuses are not repeated in the future, either directly or indirectly.
