Over 100 British citizens holed up in Syrian detention camps should be brought home to prevent future jihadi terror attacks in the UK, a former MI6 chief has said.
Richard Barrett, who headed up counterterrorism at the secret service, warned the high number of UK-linked detainees—including jihadi bride Shamima Begum—could embolden Islamic terrorists to refocus their murderous sights on Britain.
Speaking to MPs, Mr. Barrett described how the al-Hol and al-Roj refugee camps are not only putting British citizens—including children—at risk of violence, sexual abuse, and radicalisation, but are extremely vulnerable to being seized and overtaken by ISIS.
His views have been echoed by two other counterterrorism experts who told the Foreign Affairs Committee this week that Britain is now almost completely isolated in its approach to repatriating those from the war-torn country.
It remains one of the only countries in Western Europe to hold a hardline stance against repatriating suspected British terror sympathisers and their children, the panel heard.
The tough policy means Britain is seen as a “dangerous outlier” which poses risks including being a target of future jihadi terror attacks.
Harmonie Toros, professor of international relations at University of Reading, said: “By remaining on this position of, we do not repatriate our citizens, it is putting the UK in a particular situation of sitting as an outlier.
“At the moment the IS propaganda machine is down, that doesn’t necessarily mean that it always will be.
‘Unstable’
Paul Jordan, of the European Institute of Peace, said there is a danger of ISIS seizing the grievances of British Muslims who have been stripped of their citizenship to rebuild the terror group.He described the current displacement camps as “unstable,” proven by last year’s ISIS prison break at the Al-Sina’a camp.
ISIS terrorists launched a 10-day long attack to free detained fighters from the prison, which left an estimated 500 people dead, including detainees, prison staff, and civilians, and an unknown number of ISIS fighters escaped.
The breakout was described at the time as the most sophisticated ISIS operation since its 2019 defeat.
Mr. Jordan, who has visited the camps, said the Kurdish authorities are consistently saying they can no longer cope.
“What it also shows from a UK perspective, is the fact that UK citizens are contained there, and there’s a very high chance that they could be killed in one of these [attacks].
“They could be broken out, they could be lost.
“And if we don’t deal with it, then there is a significant chance that either ISIS or others will end up taking over the prisons.”
Mr. Barrett said ISIS “see the prisons as a source of manpower.”
“It [the breakout] did expose weaknesses in the defence of the prisons and I think it did remind other potential sympathisers and a lot of people being they are being held without charge.
“So it was quite a good recruiting sergeant, to expose so double standards.”
British Funding
The British government currently funds the running of two detention camps in war-torn Syria, set up in the wake of the 2019 fall of Baghouz, which formally ended ISIS claims over territory in the region.In 2022, the United Nations said it believed Britain had been funding the running of the camps—carried out by Syrian Kurds on behalf of the West—to the tune of £20 million.
In a letter sent to Foreign Secretary James Cleverly last month, former Cabinet minister David Davis urged the government to end its policy of funding the illegal detention of children in the northeast Syrian camps.
Mr. Davis also asked Mr. Cleverly to disclose how many British minors are being held in camps.
France, Germany, Spain, Denmark, Canada, the Netherlands and several other countries have repatriated families from northeast Syria and there was a consensus among the UK’s allies, notably the United States, that governments cannot bury their heads in the sand on the matter.
Ms. Toros told the committee that Britain’s position on refusing to repatriate citizens has left its allies “perplexed.”
“The UK has the means to deal with this situation, it has a multi-agency approach to radicalisation and countering violent extremism.
“It has set one up, it’s for the last 20 years. It includes the NHS, it includes social care, it includes education, it includes the police services, we have the setup, it’s not as if the UK is unprepared to deal with this.
“A maximum of 100 people that [are] UK citizens we’re talking about.
“So this is what is so difficult to understand, in the sense that there are also multi-agency responses that are set up in in France, in Holland, and in Belgium, in Germany. Why is the UK refusing to do this?”
Sexual Violence
Describing the day-to-day state of the camps, the experts said there is daily violence, sexual abuse, and radicalisation.Those most at risk are boys, some as young as 10, who have been taken away from their mothers and locked up inside “rehabilitation” camps.
Ms. Toros said, “We’re in a situation where British children who have done nothing other than be born, are being punished for essentially the crimes of their parents.”
Over 60 percent of those in the camps are children, 80 percent of which are under 12.
Of those who are now adults, Ms. Toros said: “Some people were tricked into going, some people went as minors.
“You know, if you were brought by your family there when you were 12 [or] 13, and then you become an adult, what is your status then?”
She said it was becoming increasingly hard to explain why other countries such as Iraq have repatriated almost 4,000 people from Syria, but the UK won’t even engage with just 100 citizens.
“We’re talking about a small enough group of people, that there can be a real investigation done on a case-by-case basis of the adults,” she said.
“I mean, the Iraqis have repatriated 3,700 people, for them to do a case-by-case basis, is an extraordinary amount of work.
“If we’re talking about 100 people, I think it’s a very different reality.”
Mr. Barrett said that other U.N. countries are still waiting on the UK to have a “sensible policy” on Syria and those British citizens indefinitely housed there.
He said: “Particularly when you look at some of the actions taken against, for example, Shamima Begum.
“I think that the Foreign Office was in a bit of a bind, because you could see the unsustainability of the Home Office policy, of just to keep these people out, because you know, what was going to happen to them? They weren’t going to disappear in a puff of smoke.”
Questions
Mr. Barrett said there “are questions to be asked” as to why anyone from the UK travelled to join “the Islamic State.”He said: “In my view, I don’t know of anyone who went over to join the Islamic State from the UK to train to be a domestic terrorist, to train and come back and commit attacks here.
“They went to join something, there was a pull factor, but there was also a push factor as well.
“They felt they maybe didn’t have the opportunity or felt discriminated against in some way or second class here, or just isolated from society in some way.
“And I think you have to look at the reasons why people went before you can decide what the right treatment is.”
Committee Chairwoman Alicia Kearns said that regardless of push factors, personal responsibility had to be recognised.
Mr. Jordan of the European Institute of Peace responded: “If you do want them to answer to that responsibility, then there has to be some form of accountability, and at the moment, there is none of that. They are just in a camp.”
Mr. Jordan said that if the UK wanted ISIS terror suspects or sympathisers to be tried for treason or answer to any crimes, it should create a framework to do so.
“And that’s basically what those of us on this side are saying is that you don’t need to forget their crimes or forget what they did, or particularly like them.
“But there does have to be some justice, there does have to be some accountability, and that involves a process.
“At the moment, if you say, well, fine, they ripped up their passports, all you’re really doing is pushing that on to the Kurds.”
