Click the link provided in the citation to read the original article from The Guardian itself:
Chulov,
Martin. "Qatari Jet Sits On Tarmac In Baghdad As Royal Hostages
Await Release". The Guardian.
Last modified April 19, 2017. Accessed April 19, 2017.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/19/qatari-jet-sits-on-tarmac-in-baghdad-as-royal-hostages-await-release.
- - -
An
aircraft sent by Qatar to retrieve 26 kidnapped member's of Doha's
royal family has, according to an article in the UK's Guardian
newspaper, remained on the tarmac of a Baghdad airport for a fourth
straight day as a result of a delay in a deal exchanging the Qatari
royal hostages for a ransom payment alongside safe passage of all
those wishing to leave the Syrian towns of Kefraya and Fua. This as
all part of the comprehensive and delicately negotiated deal
regarding population swaps occurring in the area. The release and
exchange was delayed by the suicide car bombing of buses full of
evacuees on April 16th
which resulted in 126
deaths. The negotiations have laid bare at least a fraction of the
complex webs of contacts and alliances involved in the agreement on
population swaps, underpinned by the diplomatic engagement and
guarantees of Iran and Qatar. Many of the militant groups involved
are scheduled to get pay-outs with the disbursement of the ransom
money, leading some in the rebel camp to postulate the bombing may
have been carried out by a group who was not in on the deal and thus
would not be obtaining any of the money.
As so
often occurs in war, human rights are not part of the relevant combat
discourse and thus remain the partial, elevated ideal constantly
propounded by Western countries and the United Nations. It seems
that, in the case of similar state terrorism, the global discourse on
human rights is somewhat effective at naming and shaming state actors
who were complicit, as in the case of the chemical weapons attack
likely carried out by the Syrian regime on the town of Khan Shaykun
earlier this month. The weight of such condemnation does not apply
with the same force, however, when directed at amorphous non-state
actors such as splintered rebel groups or militant jihadists, leading
to a narrow selectivity as to which severe breaches of human rights
are straightforward enough in their occurrence to warrant a
temporarily exclusive focus. In this case, it is easy to chastise a
recognized state for war crimes, but it is far too complex and
ineffective to attempt a similar strategy in regards to non-state
actors, especially when they are in fragmentary abundance and thus
cannot be discussed as a singular monolith. As such, the Qatari
government's efforts to secure royal release through a mixture of
guarantor diplomacy and paying ransom exists in a moral grey-zone, as
the possible blow-back is implied in providing such groups with
significant financing, thus putting a greater premium on the future
kidnapping of Qatari royals as a valuable risk with a significant
potential payout. This, in the long run, also finances further
breaches of fundamental human rights within the obfuscated murkiness
of Syria's many non-state rebel groups. Perhaps, then, it might be
time to open up the human rights dialogue in regards to Qatar's
hostage swap, permitting a level of nuance in discussion that will
evade the simplicity of straightforward condemnation.
WRITTEN IN LATE APRIL 2017.
