THE headlines have been dominated by stories of women in the caliphate since Shamima Begum’s plea to return to the UK following four years as a wife to an Islamic State jihadist.
Noticeably absent, however, are stories on the thousands of Yazidi women who remain missing in the hands of the caliphate and who are begging for their freedom.
The case of Shamima Begum raises important questions surrounding citizenship and terrorism, legal justice and rehabilitation, among others. It is important to consider the potential for prosecution in Britain and to discuss how this may happen. However, we need to remember the victims of the murderous group she travelled to join, and whose suffering has been marginalised in media coverage.
This is especially the case for the Yazidis of Iraq and Syria, who have been subject to genocide by Isis and are recognised as the most persecuted victims of the terror group.
Having spent six months with Yazidis in a Greek refugee camp, there was a prevailing sense of abandonment; both in 2014 and at present, with more than 3,000 Yazidi women and children in Isis captivity. More than 80 per cent of Yazidis in Iraq have been displaced and languish in tents in Kurdistan, susceptible to fire and flooding. Those who have risked their lives to reach Europe remain vulnerable to further attack.
Nadia Murad, a Yazidi and Nobel Peace Prize recipient, is often seen as a beacon of hope for the community. She has travelled across the globe seeking justice for her community. The UK, among many others, has recognised the genocide but refuses to give safe haven to its victims. Her calls for justice remain largely unheard. Such calls will continue to go unheard if the focus remains on the terrorists themselves.
There are numerous obstacles to achieving peace and a bright future for the Yazidis. A good starting point, however, would be to provide exposure on their plight, rather than those who have committed and supported genocide against them. Forgetting is the first step to ensuring it will happen again.
Holly Johnston,
4 Gowanbank Road,
Ayr.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here