Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on Dec. 1st, 2011

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you.

Mr. Sweet.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Mukasey.

You mentioned a modest force. What would be the minimum force required for such an operation?

[Michael B. Mukasey]

I don't have a military background. I am repeating what I've heard from people who do have military training, including the U.S. colonel who was charge of the area before. He estimated a force of 1,000 to 1,500.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

That would be strictly to keep them safe from the Iraqi forces, without taking into consideration reprisals that might come from Iran.

[Michael B. Mukasey]

I guess that's right, but you'd have to really talk to him about that.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

I understand.

Do you know what access the United Nations now has to that camp?

[Michael B. Mukasey]

The United Nations has access pretty much at the will of the Iraqi government. But there has been some UN access, simply because the Iraqi government will not risk direct confrontation with the entire international community. They have allowed some people from UNHCR to go in, but they do it only on a very limited basis and under certain conditions. They've blocked the interview process. They've insisted that it take place outside Camp Ashraf at remote locations, and that's something that should not be done for security reasons, obviously.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

I certainly agree with you on that. I was assured by the Iraqi Ambassador to Canada that the U.N. did have access, but now I see that it's one thing to have free and unfettered access, and another to have controlled access.

[Michael B. Mukasey]

Correct.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

I know you've said that the United States government has been quiet on this. To your knowledge, has there been any communication, any undertakings by the U.S. government, to compel the Iraqi government to adopt a different understanding of when and how this should all play out, rather than at the end of December?

[Michael B. Mukasey]

I do not know. I know that Mr. Maliki is scheduled to travel here within the next two weeks, and I'm hoping this is on the agenda.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Do you have anything else to say, Mr. Hiebert? Please continue.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

It's been stated that the MEK has been involved in terrorist operations against Iran, and against the Iraqi citizens in the past. Even at this table it's been mentioned that it worked in cooperation with Saddam Hussein and his former regime. That was some time ago, though.

The reason our government continues to have it on a terrorist list is that it believes there are reasonable grounds to believe it was knowingly involved in these kinds of activities in the past.

Do you believe it was engaged in these kinds of terrorist activities?

[Michael B. Mukasey]

You say “these kinds of terrorist activities”. It's a very broad question.

I think MEK members were involved in some kind of activity against the Iranian government at some point. There's no doubt about that, but I can't speak to what kind. I know the standard under U.S. law is whether they have done anything within the last two years and whether they have the ability and inclination to act now or in the future. As to both of those questions, I'm quite confident the answer is no.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Okay, that was going to be my next question. To what degree do you think they're a future or imminent threat?

[Michael B. Mukasey]

The best evidence of that is what they've done and what they've said. What they've done is to surrender all of the weapons they had, voluntarily, in 2003 and 2004. They had heavy weapons and they had light weapons, and they surrendered them in return for an assurance that they would be protected. They don't sound like a group of terrorists to me.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Fair enough.

[Michael B. Mukasey]

I will tell you that the colonel who was in charge of that area said he felt that they were a friendly force, that he could rely on them, and that they helped U.S. troops in material ways.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Some have said that they could not be classified as refugees; therefore, the UNHCR would not be in a position to help them transfer to other nations. How do you respond to that challenge?

[Michael B. Mukasey]

If you don't want to do something, you can always find all sorts of technical reasons for not doing it. The fact is that they are seeking refuge, and they are seeking refuge from their own government. I don't know of any better definition of a refugee than that.

[Russ Hiebert, Conservative, South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale, BC]

Those are all my questions. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Mr. Cotler has to leave early.

Do you have any further questions before you go, Professor Cotler? You're okay?

[Irwin Cotler, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

In that case, we go to Mr. Marston and Madame Péclet.