It is no secret that the Islamic State is merciless toward prisoners of war held in Iraq and Syria, often killing them in mass executions. Reports reaching Al-Monitor from Iraq indicate that Iraqi security forces are themselves executing IS fighters they capture or who surrender. The same fate awaits Sunni civilians accused of collaborating with IS, as happened during the fierce battle for Tikrit. Media reports have also implicated Kurdish peshmerga and Shiite militias in executing captured IS militants and allied local civilians.

On top of such actions, there are no families publicly shedding tears for IS fighters, and there is no international body monitoring their fate. Although an occasional meek voice rises from the Muslim world, it is disturbing that there has been no concerted reaction to this type of violence in Iraq. It is unclear as well whether the United States has a clear, standing policy on the legal status and treatment of captured or surrendered IS militants.

What are the consequences of an apparently discreet but common understanding that no IS militant is to be taken alive? This mercilessly intolerant attitude toward prisoners is not exclusive to the dirty war raging in Iraq.

Peter Maurer, president of the International Committee of the Red Cross, notes that there are four major Geneva conventions, with 175 clauses, that regulate the status of POWs in wars and conflicts involving nation-states. There thus appear to be substantial institutional provisions and control mechanisms in international law on the legal status of POWs in interstate conflicts.