Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on Feb. 11th, 2014

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Order.

Welcome to the 11th meeting of the Subcommittee on International Human Rights of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development. Today is Tuesday, February 11, 2014.

We have only one hour, and some of that time has been used up, unfortunately, in the transition from the previous committee. I think if we see the clock generously, we can get back our hour by starting a little bit later than we intended.

We are going to be looking today at the situation in Camp Ashraf. We have two witnesses with us: Jared Genser, who will be starting, followed by retired Colonel Wesley Martin from the United States Army, who is joining us from Pennsylvania by video conference.

I understand, Mr. Sweet, that you wanted to get my attention?

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

Yes, Mr. Chair.

I am asking for the indulgence of my colleagues here at the committee. I've learned conclusively today—it's been in the media—from Shahbaz Bhatti's brother Peter Bhatti that there has been a fatwa issued in Pakistan for Sikander Bhatti, Shahbaz Bhatti's younger brother. Gerard Bhatti is still there; and Paul, his brother who has taken up Shahbaz Bhatti's position in the government, is staying in Italy now because of clear and present danger to his immediate safety.

I just want to ask my colleagues—because of the nature of the situation, the importance of it, and the history of Shahbaz with our committee—if we would be open to clearing our schedule, if possible, the first Tuesday that we're back. Hopefully Paul will be able to make arrangements to fly from Italy and sit before our committee and inform us on the exact circumstances happening in Pakistan with his family.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Would it be acceptable to you, Mr. Sweet, if we dealt with that off-line and sought a consensus outside of the committee?

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

Yes, absolutely.

I wanted to make sure that all my colleagues were aware of that, as well as that he is willing to make the flight here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you.

We're going to start with Jared Genser. My apologies for the fact that we're starting later than I would have liked.

I know the clerk has already taken you through all the technicalities, so please feel free to begin your presentation.

[Jared Genser, Managing Director, Perseus Strategies]

Good afternoon, Chairman Reid, distinguished members of the Subcommittee on International Human Rights, ladies and gentlemen.

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak with you today about the dire need for the protection of the 3,100 individuals currently detained in Iraq's substandard prison camp near Baghdad, called Camp Hurriya, also known as Camp Liberty.

All of the residents of Camp Liberty previously resided in Camp Ashraf.

I'd like to begin by thanking the subcommittee for its ongoing commitment to providing an essential forum for exposing the human rights violations that have been committed against the residents in Camp Ashraf, and now Camp Liberty.

Today I want to first provide you a very brief overview about who the residents are. Second, I'll talk about the chain of events that have led to the current situation whereby thousands of people were transferred from Camp Ashraf to Camp Liberty. Third, I'll detail the September 2013 assault on Camp Ashraf, of which I conducted a highly detailed assessment on behalf of a German NGO called Rights for Migrants. Fourth, I'll talk about the most recent developments in Camp Liberty, including a further December 2013 rocket attack, and lastly I'll highlight what I think Canada might be able to do most effectively to help secure rights for the residents of Camp Liberty.

As you're aware, the residents who live in Camp Liberty are of the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran, or PMOI, an Iranian political organization devoted to replacing the current Iranian regime with a secular and democratic government.

Since its establishment in 1965, its members have suffered sustained persecution, including regular detentions and executions in Iran. Even after the 1979 revolution and removal of the shah, they continued to be targets of violent attacks, which is what ultimately led them to relocate to Iraq where their members could continue their campaign for freedom and democracy against the Iranian theocracy, including by conducting armed attacks against the Iranian military and government targets.

After coalition forces invaded in 2003, the U.S. military occupied Camp Ashraf; the residents gave up their weapons; the U.S. government conducted security assessments on each of them; and ultimately coalition forces designated each resident as a protected person under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

In return for giving up their weapons and signing, individually and collectively, statements renouncing all violence and terrorism, residents were promised protection by coalition forces until their final status was determined.

In 2009 coalition forces withdrew from Iraq and the U.S. transferred responsibility for the protection of the residents to the Iraqi government. Since then the residents have suffered from numerous abuses at the hands of the Iraqi government. Camp Ashraf and Camp Liberty have been attacked six times in the last five years, with more than 100 people killed and hundreds more wounded.

As I previously mentioned, on September 1, 2013 the Iraqi government carried out or facilitated a massacre directed against the 101 residents remaining at Camp Ashraf who had been left behind to watch over their remaining property. At 5:15 a.m., approximately 120 men dressed in military uniforms, carrying AK-47s with silencers, and loaded up with armour-piercing bullets, pistols, and explosives engaged in a coordinated assault against the camp residents.

For two hours the Iraqi attackers scoured the camp, searching room by room, killing 52 with coup de grâce shots to the head. Many residents were handcuffed before being executed. Millions of dollars' worth of property was destroyed. The attackers seized seven hostages—six women and one man—and forcibly transported them outside of the camp, leaving behind a scene of destruction. The remaining 42 residents managed to survive the attack by hiding or escaping.

On behalf of a German NGO, Rights for Migrants, I interviewed all the survivors via Skype individually, looked at Google mapping technology to understand the distances between various points within the camp itself, and produced a highly detailed report analyzing what had taken place.

After initially acknowledging its role in the attack and the abduction of hostages, the Government of Iraq now denies its involvement in the attack and any knowledge of the hostages' whereabouts, although reports suggest they had been moved to a detention centre near Baghdad.

Despite this denial, eyewitness accounts place the Iraqi police at the scene and indeed there are some 1,200 plus Iraqi police and military inside, outside, and around the camp, making it completely implausible that anybody would not notice such an attack taking place. In fact, there are numerous accounts of eyewitness testimony that made clear that the guards at the various guard posts through which the attackers entered opened the gates for them to enter and facilitated their entry.

Other attacks on Camp Ashraf in 2009 and 2011, which killed dozens and wounded many more, were actually acknowledged by the Government of Iraq to be committed by its own forces. But even if none of this direct evidence or pattern of practice existed, Camp Ashraf is indisputably an Iraqi prison camp on Iraqi sovereign territory, and the Government of Iraq had exclusive jurisdiction and responsibility to protect these people.

Today roughly 3,100 live in Camp Liberty, in poor conditions, with limited security protections. Unfortunately, the international community has done very little to address their needs. It's been two years since UNHCR began processing their claims for asylum. So far not a single resident has been granted refugee status. The vast majority of the residents have now been given the designation of persons with international protection needs, IPNs, which is a lesser status that only prohibits their refoulement to Iran and that removes ordinary channels through which actually designated refugees in danger could be resettled. UNHCR reports that it expects the remaining residents will also be designated IPNs.

To be clear, this means that without any accusations actually having been made against the residents and without any opportunity having been given to them to respond, UNHCR has determined that it's unwilling to certify that the residents en masse have not engaged in illegal acts of violence. Such a conclusion is inconsistent with international refugee law, including the requirement to determine each person's refugee status individually, and the presumption against using group affiliation to disqualify a person for refugee status.

To be clear, given that historically the PMOI directed its attacks against Iranian government and military targets, such acts would not be illegal under international law, and any claims that they've done otherwise have been refuted by credible evidence put forward by a range of other experts.

Belying the challenge of resettling IPNs, only 10% of the population has been resettled in the last two years and there are no prospects of a major resettlement forthcoming. As the remaining residents hope to be resettled, the Government of Iraq continues to deny them security protection. The residents are forced to live in thin paper-walled trailers and they have no protective shields against missile attacks. Although several agreements have been forged between the international community and the Government of Iraq for the delivery of more protective walls and bunkers, which the residents themselves have to pay for, only a small number have been delivered and the government has prevented their delivery from continuing.

Furthermore, the residents have been subjected to ongoing harassment and threats of future violent attacks. Harassment, among other tactics, includes delaying patients trying to go to the hospital, resulting in a loss of appointments with specialized doctors; holding deliveries of food at the entrance of the camp for several days until it's partially rotted; refusing to allow the residents to obtain their own forklift to lift heavy goods, and thus forcing them to carry them with their bare hands; and refusing to allow septic trucks to leave the camp to discharge collected sewage.

Despite international commitments to protect the residents of Camp Liberty, the Iraqi government has also prevented the entry of protective gear, including vests, helmets, sandbags, and other forms of protection, rendering the residents basically defenceless against attacks. Thus the camp remains void of basic security protection, especially from Iraqi-led assaults.

Less than two months ago, on December 26, 2013, there was another missile attack on Camp Liberty, killing 3 and wounding 71. The UN and the EU have condemned this attack and have called for the international community to intensify its efforts to find resettlement opportunities outside Iraq. The Government of Canada has also condemned these attacks and has been very vocal publicly, making clear that the international community has a duty to respect its obligations to these people.

Based on the evidence of numerous Iraqi-led and/or facilitated attacks and the current conditions in Camp Liberty, the Government of Iraq has committed numerous violations of international law, including crimes against humanity under customary international law binding on all states as well as the provisions of three treaties to which Iraq is a party: the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Iraq has not only violated the residents' right to life, to be free from torture, and to be free from arbitrary detention, but has also consistently failed to protect the residents who were designated protected persons under the Fourth Geneva Convention. Beyond my own legal assessment of the situation, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, a body of the Human Rights Council, has issued two opinions that found that residents were being held in violation of international law.

In full disclosure, at the time, I was representing the residents and took one of those cases myself to the working group.

It's clear that, especially because the residents are in an Iraqi prison camp, they are not safe in Iraq. I'm here today not only to explain what they've suffered but to urge the Canadian government and the international community to intervene to assist the residents. Regardless of who carried out the attacks, it is undisputed that innocent people have been routinely killed or executed and forced to live in unsafe and insecure conditions. Given the ongoing violations of international human rights law, along with the residents' lack of safety and security, urgent action must be taken.

Unfortunately, many states have been hesitant to allow the residents of Camp Liberty to resettle in their countries, deferring to the responsibility of the United States, which, regrettably, has not resettled any of them.

While the unwillingness of the U.S. to fulfill its commitments to the residents is troubling, it does not discharge other countries from considering action on a humanitarian basis to save these human lives. Even if, like Canada, you were not part of President Bush's coalition of the willing, which invaded Iraq in 2003, it remains undisputed that the residents have been internationally recognized as protected persons and asylum seekers, that they're unarmed and defenceless, and that for five years they've been detained in Iraqi prison camps.

There's no doubt, of course, that there are millions of people around the world suffering from ruthless and authoritarian dictatorship. One only need highlight Syria as a great illustration of that phenomena, let alone look to countries like North Korea, Sudan, and others. But it's actually a small sliver of a percentage of that much larger number where the international community has made specific actionable commitments to protect a population on which it has failed to deliver. Such inaction in the face of crimes against humanity, committed against populations we have specifically and unequivocally committed to protect, undermines all people's confidence in commitments made by all governments on human rights.

To conclude, and to address this terrible situation, I'd respectfully suggest that the following steps be undertaken.

First, it's worth noting that Canada has taken a leadership role globally in standing up to the abuses committed by the Iranian regime. The PMOI members in Camp Liberty have been at the vanguard of this struggle. The best way, in my view, to maintain a strong position with Iran would be for Canada to allow at least several hundred of them to resettle here. It is clear that rapid resettlement of the residents of Camp Ashraf, now Camp Liberty, is the only way to guarantee their safety and security. By taking such a humanitarian gesture, the Canadian government could both save lives and send a clear signal to Tehran about that government's illegitimacy.

Second, I urge the Canadian government to speak out about the Iraqi government's blatant disregard for human rights and to pressure the international community to make serious and meaningful commitments to resettling the residents abroad.

Finally, it's equally important now, especially given the deal among the great powers on Iran and its nuclear program, for Canada and the rest of the international community to continue to make clear that even if we do see progress on addressing the nuclear questions, which is something that we all aspire to—it remains an open question, of course, as to whether that progress will actually be achieved—for Iran to be welcomed back into the community of nations, it will need to stop its sponsorship of terrorism, including its ongoing support for Bashar al-Assad in Syria; stop funding terrorist organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas; stop making statements inciting genocide directed against Israel; and stop the myriad of ongoing human rights abuses directed at its own population that are designed to terrorize its people, especially women and minorities but also human rights defenders, lawyers, and political activists, among others.

Thank you again for hosting this important conversation. I'm happy to answer any questions you might have at the appropriate time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you, Mr. Genser.

Colonel Martin, please feel free to start your testimony.

[Colonel, Retired) Wesley Martin (Military Police, United States Army, As an Individual]

Chairman Reid and members of the Canadian Parliament subcommittee, once again, I appreciate working with you. In the spirit of the camaraderie that we do have, I am joined by Dr. BioDun Ogundayo, who will translate the French for me. He teaches French here at the University of Pittsburgh Bradford campus.

Ladies and gentlemen, I appreciate this opportunity to address with you the situation in Camp Liberty and in Iraq. I regret that we are not able to be physically together today. It is always a pleasure working with you.

Since we last met, the Mujahideen-e-Khalq residents have completely left Camp Ashraf. On September 1, 2013, a murderous assault was conducted on the camp and against the 101 property custodians left at Camp Ashraf per joint agreement between the Government of Iraq, the U.S. Department of State, and United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq. The smoke from the rifles and the explosions had barely settled before the U.S. state department and other supporters of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki commenced declaring that there was no evidence that the Government of Iraq was involved.

As the senior force protection and anti-terrorism officer for all coalition forces in Iraq and the former base commander of Camp Ashraf, I state that there is no way the Iraqi government could not have been involved. Camp Ashraf is in the middle of nowhere. Nothing and nobody can get within five miles of that camp without being seen by the Iraqi tower guards.

In a swarming attack formation, the assault force, wearing Iraqi special weapons and tactics uniforms, came from the Iraqi compound located directly north of the MeK compound. Their body movements were developed in the United States: Weaver stance, low ready. Those assault forces or their trainers had been educated by American special response team specialists. They copied our movements too well to have been trained by anyone else.

Armed with rifles with silencers and with various explosives, including American explosives dated 2006, the assault team moved with total precision throughout the camp. Unarmed residents were gunned down, several shot in the head while their hands were already secured behind their backs. More were murdered in the medical aid station while being treated for wounds already received. MeK leaders, especially, endured multiple rounds fired into their heads. These murderous attacks, accompanied by explosions and rising smoke from equipment and vehicles being destroyed, lasted for two hours.

With military precision and total coordination, this assault force departed in the same direction it came, to the north, to the Iraqi compound. With it went several hostages, driven out in a vehicle stolen from Camp Ashraf. Survivors of the massacre were later able to photograph the vehicle immediately outside an Iraqi military building, yet defenders of Nouri al-Maliki claim that no evidence exists to prove the Iraqi government was involved.

On the first day of the attack, only one locally stationed United Nations observer showed up. He toured the massacre site, but that was it. It took three days for somebody from the U.S. state department to show up, and then, once again, only to tour the massacre site. Never was an on-site investigation completed. No bullet casings were ever picked up and no inspection of explosive materials ever performed.

None of the basics expected of a professional investigation were conducted. It is easy to claim that no evidence exists when there is no proper investigation.

In the past year, Camp Liberty has been hit with four precision rocket attacks. Loss of life continues to mount. Each time Maliki's supporters claim that there is no evidence the Iraqi government was involved. Also each time, these supporters jump on al-Battat's claim that his Iraqi Hezbollah performed the attacks, even though al-Battat has yet to correctly state the number of rockets fired. Each time, he claimed responsibility for less than half of the total ordnance that struck the camp. The true attackers know how many rounds were fired. Furthermore, even in Iraq, rogue militias do not freely drive around in vehicles mounted with 280-millimetre rocket launchers.

We hear the news reports about the al-Qaeda problem in Iraq. The true problem is Nouri al-Maliki's genocide, which has forced the Sunni population to make a last stand. Attached to my testimony are three excellent articles from Struan Stevenson, member of the European Parliament and president of the delegation for relations with Iraq.

Mr. Stevenson totally understands the problems that Iraqi citizens are facing.

Meanwhile, over 2,900 former residents of Camp Ashraf are now at Camp Liberty. Over two years ago, Mayor Giuliani referred to this as a concentration camp. Last time I testified before you, I called it an extermination camp in waiting. The waiting is over. Scores have already died from the rocket attacks. Others have died while being denied access to timely medical support. Their sewage tanks are rupturing. Food shipments are being blocked from entry until the perishable cargo has rotted. Repair items already purchased are not being allowed into the area. The use of their forklifts and rented cranes is being impeded, and simple tools like shovels have to be hand-made inside the camp. Daily harassment from Iraqi intelligence officers is a never-ending story.

Then we have the issue of force protection equipment. After the first rocket attack, senior intelligence officer Colonel Sadiq had all 17,500 T-walls removed from the camp. The walls had proved to be very effective in saving lives. It has been an uphill battle and never-surmountable...[Technical difficulty--Editor]...for the residents to have the walls returned. Protective bunkers for the residents are suffering the same fate. Attached is a matrix I recently developed concerning the status of their force protection equipment.

In closing, what the residents are enduring is nothing short of despicable. These residents have been constantly lied to and lied about. They have suffered dearly, and have picked up the tab for these lies, often with their lives.

I sincerely appreciate this opportunity to once again testify before you, and look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

Thank you, Colonel.

Colleagues, looking at the clock, we have enough time for five-minute rounds of questions and answers. Because we have two witnesses, I'll ask you to, (a), make it clear to whom you're asking your question, and (b), take into account the fact that if you want both of them to answer it will take a little extra time and you will have to adjust accordingly. It may be that if you don't plan correctly, you'll only get one question out because the time will get entirely eaten up by the two answers.

With that warning, we begin with Ms. Grewal, please.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

I would like to begin by thanking Mr. Genser and Colonel Martin for joining us today. I'd also like to commend Mr. Genser for the work he's doing as international counsel to the residents of Camp Liberty and Camp Ashraf.

In the independent report on events of September 1, 2013, at Camp Ashraf in Iraq, you wrote that the UNHCR should grant refugee status to all residents through a group determination, and in accordance with its mandate, take full responsibility for the residents in Ashraf and Liberty and provide them with international protection.

Do you think this will be an effective measure to help the residents of the camps? Do you think neighbouring countries such as Albania will be willing to accept the camp residents?

[Jared Genser]

Thank you very much for the actually critical question that you're asking.

I do want to clarify that while I previously represented the residents for about a year and a half in relation to the arbitrary detention, for the last year and a half I have not represented them directly. I've been working with the German NGO through which I did this report that has been indirectly supportive of them and their situation.

Currently we have seen only 300 resettled in total, less than 10% of the total population. About 200 have gone to Albania. About 100 have gone to a number of different EU countries and a handful of Scandinavian countries. But we've seen very, very little progress in that regard.

As an international human rights lawyer, my focus has been on what tools exist currently that would enable us to expedite their resettlement. One doesn't have to have a position on the political orientation of this particular group. One only needs to be a fellow human being to see what they are suffering and to want to end that suffering.

I've advocated that UNHCR, as it's done on many occasions in the past...including, by the way, in a place in Iraq, Camp Makmur, where PKK residents openly carry weapons and where UNHCR did a group determination. Such a path could be followed with respect to the PMOI. It is a death penalty offence to be a member of the PMOI in Iran. Thus, by definition, they have a well-founded fear of persecution if they were to be returned to Iran on political grounds.

We know that obviously they've been persecuted not only in Iran but also in Iraq. UNHCR has at its disposal, in extraordinary circumstances...and in particular, the criteria suggest that it's when the health and safety of individual asylum seekers is in fact threatened. We know, based on the six attacks in the last five years, that in fact their lives are seriously threatened—four attacks just this past year at Camp Liberty, and the attack at Camp Ashraf and otherwise. So those basic criteria have been met for doing a group determination.

Unfortunately, my assessment is that UNHCR has strayed, very regrettably, from its humanitarian mission. Its mission should be narrowly focused on assessing whether or not these people have claims for asylum that are valid and ultimately issuing a decision as to whether or not they should be refugees in accordance with international law.

Unfortunately, the politics in Iraq and the broader set of issues that UNAMI, the UN Assistance Mission for Iraq, has with the Government of Iraq have meant that UNHCR seems to have subsumed its activities within the broader UN mission. It seems to me that UNAMI has unfortunately concluded that they have more important issues to deal with than this one and that they don't want to put pressure on Maliki with regard to the situation in Camp Liberty.

I think the international community and donors to UNHCR, including Canada, should be putting pressure on UNHCR to merely do its job—to actually either do a group determination or an individual determination and come to a conclusion as to whether or not these people are refugees. So far they're not willing to do that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

You have 30 seconds left, Ms. Grewal.

[Jared Genser]

I'm sorry about that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

No, that's okay.

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

I don't think I'll be able to finish my question in 30 seconds. That's fine.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

We'll go to Mr. Marston, please.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Colonel Martin, welcome back, and sir, welcome as well.

This is a very troubling situation. We've been looking at this for some time.

I believe it was your testimony last time, Colonel Martin, that the influence of Iran in Iraq was a growing concern at that point in time. I notice from the information you have provided us about the executions in Iraq and the things that are happening there that they seem to be getting rid of the Sunni establishment that was there for so long. Do you see that as having direct implications for the MeK who are in Camp Liberty?

I'll go a little bit further and give you a couple of other things to work with. I think it's appropriate to try to understand the politics of the UN's Human Rights Council and other folks, because there seems to be a lot of politics in this one. There were accusations on ABC television network about the MeK, the CIA, the assassination of scientists, and a variety of things.

Do either of you see any of that in play in this?

[Col Wesley Martin]

It's totally on the MeK at Camp Liberty. In one of my recent reports—and I believe many of you get my weekly reports—I mentioned that al-Maliki had just returned from Tehran, that he needed to please his bosses in Tehran, and that we could expect an attack very soon on Camp Liberty. That report went out on December 22. It was on the 26th that the next rocket attack came in.

Also, there are the articles you mentioned that were written by Struan Stevenson of the European Parliament. Struan has a very thorough understanding of what's going on in that area, and he's seeing the same thing that I am. Al-Maliki is committing genocide. This business in Anbar province is not heavily al-Qaeda. I was in the room in D.C. when al-Maliki was claiming that it was all al-Qaeda. No, it's not. They're making their last stand because of his genocide.

Ayatollah Khomeini made the comment that the road to Jerusalem is through Baghdad. Unfortunately, the only regional commander in that area who thoroughly understands the Iranian threat is Benjamin Netanyahu. Unfortunately, our own executive branch in the United States does not have the same sense as Netanyahu of what's going on.

[Jared Genser]

I will just briefly add to that. I agree, of course, with Colonel Martin's testimony, as well as his answer. I would only say that for me this isn't about politics, although the situation is intensely political. This is about saving human lives, and as an international human rights lawyer, I have one standard that I apply when I look at the facts of the situation. Is the Government of Iraq complying with its obligations under treaties they've signed and under customary international law? The answer is clearly and unequivocally no.

So then the question becomes, okay, what can we do about it to try to improve the situation, given the limits of international law and the challenges of enforcing the treaty and customary international law obligations on Iraq? Ultimately, it has to start with the political will of particularly the United States, but the Government of Canada and other humanitarian-oriented governments are in a position to speak out about what's going on, to call out Nouri al-Maliki about what's going on, and also to hold Iran to account.

To my mind, all of this comes back to Iran, and all of this comes back to the engagement that the international community is currently having with Iran on its nuclear program. The reality, in my view, is that it is not an accident that the international community is being silent or is de-emphasizing this issue right now, because to emphasize this issue is to go at something that we in the international community know is of great importance to the mullahs in Tehran. They despise this group, and they make them their mortal enemy, because they stand for the separation of mosque and state and for a view of Islam that—

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

If I could jump in there for just a second, it strikes me from the standpoint of those people that this is an irritant for them. That's a terrible way to phrase it, but you would think that getting the folks out of Camp Liberty and getting them dispersed in safe countries would resolve a problem without raising it as the issue with Iran.

That politically can still be done. That's why I was looking at what the politics are in the sense of why people—the UN in particular—wouldn't just get these folks out of there. It would calm down the situation relative to all of the other problems, with Iran and Iraq both.

[Jared Genser]

There's an irony here. Based on the conversations I've had, particularly with the survivors of the recent Camp Ashraf attack, the residents themselves desperately want to get out of Iraq because they know they're doomed in the current situation, and yet.... You would think that if Iraq actually wants them gone, the Government of Iraq itself would go to the UNHCR and say, “Grant these people refugee status or we ourselves are going to grant them refugee status so they can depart as quickly as humanly possible.”

But the reality is that Tehran doesn't want to let them leave Iraq, because now they're trapped, and they can get them in multiple cuts. The reality is that while the claims of the Government of Iraq are that they'd like them gone, and that they're terrorists in accordance with what Tehran says, it's actually not to their benefit to let them leave, practically speaking, because their masters in Tehran don't want them to leave. They want these attacks to continue. They want more of them to be killed, and ultimately, like they did with the seven.... It's reported that the seven may well be in Tehran as we speak now, handed over by Iraqi security forces.

This is what they'd like to see happen.

[The Chair, Conservative, Scott Reid]

We'll go now to Mr. Schellenberger, please.

[Gary Schellenberger, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you.

I noticed your hand movements, Colonel. Were you wanting to respond to that question also?

[Col Wesley Martin]

I was. Right now the government in Tehran has this golden egg, because the National Council of Resistance of Iran is having to throw so much money into simply the fuel for Camp Liberty. The residents are being tormented. Everything they do is made difficult, and that situation is very pleasing to the Iranian government.

I also wish to point out that the group going to Albania, which the MeK—not the UN, not the U.S.— actually set up, the last group of 12, is being denied exit by Nouri al-Maliki because one of the people is on his list of bogus arrest warrants. Also, UNHCR is trying to slip in three members who are not Camp Liberty residents, and the concern is that they are going to go to Albania and then start causing trouble and embarrass the MeK and the NCRI even more. Yet, you don't hear the United States or UNHCR complaining that Maliki is blocking this last group from going.

[Gary Schellenberger, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you.

I've been quite troubled in the last while. Whether it be in Syria or wherever, when we have the Sunnis fighting the Shiites and the various other Muslim sects that are out there, it seems to me that a Muslim of any one of those sects is an infidel to the others.

Am I correct?