The moral blindness of the 'human rights' industry

Gareth Fieldstead

Wonderful article. It has annoyed me for years the double standards applied to Israel. At the end of the day Israel has only ever targeted terrorists, unlike the Palestinian Terrorists who only ever target civilians. The left wing press has been anti semitic in there coverage for decades, end of. As for Africa, Amnesty are the biggest hypocrites of all the human rights charities.

Richard

Melanie, you make a very interesting observation when you say "But since Israel did subscribe to those norms, it was accordingly judged by them."

What I think is most interesting, is that while Israel subscribes to these norms, the people they are fighting against do not. Subsequently when Israeli citizens are attacked by third world peoples (such as the Palestinians), only Israel is judged. And because the palestinians use tactics which are considered abhorrent by the developed world, Israel is made out to look like a war criminal, and every death of a palestinian is only attributed to them. anothermudpit.blogspot.com

Merlyn

It is up to us to insist the media keep us informed of these atrocities. They are sickening and need to be made public.

When the Jews are on the receiving end of abuse, that is kept very low key... interesting.

YA

"..the people of the third world did not have the same right to life and liberty as those in the west.."

Yes they didn't and they don't.
If one considers this quotation as facts reporting not political narrative, it doesn't look unusual.

So it's not good idea then (if one is based on facts not narrative), - to bring herds of savage immigrants "as is", from third world to the West. We have less "rights to life and liberty", as a result.

Roy

Unfortunately the years of misinformation without any opposition of consequence have done their dirty work. Its all water under the bridge. Britain with its BBC Mouthpiece has spread its Leftist Multicultural Mantra throughout the English speaking world. Only the hard nosed of them realizing the British change of character and personality. Only the odd heroic voice now managing to get the true word out. We all know the political spokespeople for responsible departments all have that tainted, missing out of relevant details about them, missing out of explanations, or missing out of peoples basic concerns. They never did get away with so much.

Occasional Ostrich

Yeah, Melanie, it was the same in the seventies, when AI repeatedly castigated the British Government for its behaviour in Northern Ireland, yet nary a cheep escaped its lips on HR abuses in the Soviet Union or China.

Always goes for the soft target.

D

"Yet the world rarely hears about Congo — because groups such as Amnesty and HRW have left the victims largely voiceless."

I think everyone should take a deep breath and think about this claim. Does it sound remotely plausible? If you're unsure, run it in reverse with Israel. If AI and HRW stopped commenting on Israel/Palestine tomorrow, would it then disappear from the media? Of course not.

Isaac Bickerstaff

It is true that there is silence about the millions who have died in Congo, to our great shame. However, there is a certain amount of humbug here. The "human rights industry" is not alone in its silence. And it is miserable casuistry to say why bother with the murder of a "handful" when more are being murdered elsewhere. There is also, I suppose, the point that Israel/Palestine is our conflict. It is not complicated. If the US were to make a serious effort to resolve it, there would be a settlement, and we would not need to worry about handfuls being killed. I do not know how the African nations or the United Nations could resolve the chaos in the Congo. I am not sure that those who use it to divert attention from Israel know either. Perhaps the "human rights industry" and its enemies should make a concerted effort to force our governments to act to stop this abomination.

"...the specific prejudice thus voiced towards the Jews..." To criticise Israel is not to voice prejudice towards the Jews, as I am sure everyone knows.

GaryO

Yesterday Nato confirmed that two rockets fired at militants during its offensive in Helmand, missed their target and killed 12 civilians. The civilian death toll in Operation Moshtarak is rising as we speak.

Where is all the hue and cry, the chest beatings and calls for Obama or Brown to be tried for "genocide"? In fact you'll be hard pressed to even find this story on the front pages of our MSM.

Now ask yourself what would have happened if it was an Israeli rocket and the victims Palestinians. There'll be demands for UN emergency sessions and condemnations of Israel pouring out like a flood.

De Ranged

.

Simple but brilliant analysis!

.

Elise

Isaac- to criticize Israel is not to criticize Jews? I am sorry but you need to see the extreme spike in violent anti-semitism world-wide and what passes for journalism about Israel in the vast majority of the world. It is replete with anti-semitic Nazi-like imagery that smacks quite frankly of historical anit-semitism. To critiize israel due to a double standard, inorder to delegitimize and dehumanize Israel to the point of allowing for genocide against her people is anti-semitism. (which is exactly what HRW and Amnesty do)I think Melanie's conversation with her erstwhile colleague belies your beliefs about what passes for anti-semitism and legitimate criticism of Israel.

Mr. Mabutoh Afunfa

First let me say thank you to Melanie and the other journalist from the New York Times who bring up this subject we all know and not too surprise that the human rights organisations only care about countries like Iran, Palestine, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen and Somalia maybe because they share one religion and read one prayer book no one cares about black Africa specially Africans from third world Christian countries like Congo this is the fact, I think it is about a time to investigate the British media and this human rights organisations why they are too busy talking bad about Israel, America and Christians but never mentioning what is happening in Black Africa

john east

I couldn't agree more, Melanie, but watch your writing a bit more carefully. You say above:

".... outraged opinion columns whenever Israel killed a handful of Palestinians,"

The use of the word, "handfull" comes across as callous and uncaring, an impression which I'm sure you did not intend to convey.

Si, N

Speaking of a 'new vocabulary to describe…horrific abuses'…

UN special rapporteur Richard Falk has argued that a new nomenclature is required to describe Israel’s treatment of the Gazans: when a modern military machine aided and abetted by The superpower imprisons a population of 1.5 million people (50% below age 18) – over a period of 6 years it terrorises that population from land, sea and sky with hi-tech weaponry inflicting death and cruel trauma on all the children – laying merciless siege it brings that population to near starvation - then in blatant defiance of a ceasefire it engages in a 28 day massacre killing 1,400 people, sending the remainder of the population back to the ‘mud age’ while the world looks on.

An Israeli soldier recently described Operation Cast Lead thusly:

'[m]ost casualties were inflicted on Palestinians by air strikes, artillery fire, and snipers from afar. Combat victory? Shooting fish in a barrel is more like it. Operation Cast Lead consisted essentially of bombing one of the most crowded places on earth, striking civilian targets such as homes, schools and mosques, and ultimately leaving a trail of more than 1,300 casualties, mostly civilians, over 300 of whom were children. As soldiers of the IDF reserves, we bow our heads in shame against this hideous attack on a civilian population'.

MP, Richard et al can fantasize about Israel meeting 'western cultural norms of respect for human life' [this notion itself is a fantasy] - but it is just that, a fantasy. 1,400 is clearly not a 'handful of Palestinians', and 'real human rights abuses' such as those enacted by Israel against the Palestinians will not be ignored.

Peter T

I have no time for Amnesty International. They exhibit obvious bias and they only appear to champion the cause of those who would do us harm ie. criminals, terrorist organisations and rogue states

Liz

I remember reading an article in the Times written during the late 70s, by Bernard Levin In it, he asked why white Rhodesians and white South Africans were continually called to account by the West for operating repressive regimes, whereas black governments in many neighbouring countries were left to continue their torture, tribal massacres and suchlike with impunity. No economic or sports sanctions for them. No large groups of aggrieved shoppers boycotting their goods,demonstrating against their politicians or vilifying their academics. From this, Levin concluded that Western governments believed the onus for moral behaviour lay at the feet of the white African alone - an attitude, by the way, whose hypocrisy shone through as brightly then as it does today. The same applies to the Israelis. They are never judged using the same criteria as applied to Hamas or Hezbollah. Alone, Israel is expected to observe all civilised codes of modern warfare even though they are fighting for their very existence. The US and Britain in Afghanistan are not. Whoever made the comment about yesterday's stray rocket killing civilians and receiving no more that a cursory mention, just about sums up the matter. Please keep up the good work, Melanie. I wish there were more people with your integrity in the media.

Isaac Bickerstaff

The picture by Blake is no doubtapposite. Did Blake not intend it as an illustration of the atrocities we in Europe and America have built our prosperity upon - atrocities against what would no doubt be called here "non-white" people. - What does our silence about the history of atrocities tell us about our "cultural relativism"?

Rob-NY

Well done again Melanie. I know he is not her favorite but Dershowitz has been hawking (pardon the pun) a new book called "The Other Six Million" about the genocide around the world since the WW2 when the UN focused on Israel than worse areas of abuse. I find "‘progressive’ cultural relativism" to be yet another nugget I will put in my debating tool belt.

Alex Bensky

Don't criticize Si N, anyone. When he says Israel broke a ceasefire he is merely using the generally accepted meaning of "ceasefire" when it comes to Arabs: Not shooting quite as many missiles as they were before." Similarly, incidentally, when it comes to Israel "disproportionate" is a synonym for "effective."

It's not just that the human rights industry finds its feathers ruffled more by Israel's misdeeds, real and fancied, than it does by the misdeeds of others on a much grander scale. It's that sympathy for the Palestinians is extended only when they're oppressed by Israelis.

Recently Jordan revoked for no particular reason the citizenship of 3,000 Palestinians. In Lebanon Palestinians cannot take out citizenship and are barred from seventy-odd different jobs and professions. In the wake of the first Gulf War Kuwait expelled 300,000 Palestinians, many of whom had been born there.

This attracted the attention and excited the interest of pretty much no one in the human rights industry. The killing of Muhammed al-Dura by Israelis is still brandished as proof of Israeli bloodthirstieness even though as it turns out the Israelis didn't kill him after all.

C. Gee

Si, N:

So, do you have a league table of bad guys?

Or is Israel the only entry?

Arnold

Thank you Melanie for having the courage to expose the hypocrisy of Amnesty.

Anton Solzhenitsyn

Read this satirical article (excellent website too). It sums up much of what you've said Melanie: http://thepeoplescube.com/red/viewtopic.php?t=4642

Dave Billings

About that Andrew Wakefield affair - any comment on that?

Ed

And a report was published by Amnesty in 2009:

http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,AMNESTY,,COD,456d621e2,4a1fadf1c,0.html

I mean I could go on if you want?

alan stoddart

45,000 each month dying in the Congo as a result of past and ongoing conflict.

No one mentions the more apt comparison...Pakistan. Created int erh same way as Israel but a very different outcome. It has mass illiteracy, poverty and corruption and unemployment. It sponsored and sponsors the Taliban, it spread nuclear technology to some very dangerous states, it continually attacks India, it sponsors many terrorist organisations within its borders. Christians are persecuted. A million died on the creation of Pakistan and millions of Hindus and Sikhs were kicked out of the new Pakistan...with no right of return.

But the media stay silent.

Inayat Bunglawala says it all with regards to conflict in Bangladesh: I was born in the UK and am not Bangladeshi, so to be honest, I very rarely think about the 1971 war. I reckon it is of much more import to those of Pakistani/Bengali backgrounds than to me.
I do nothing whatsoever to bring justice to Muslims in East Pakistan. I have enough on my plate here in the UK.

And yet he is very concerned about Israel/Palestine?

Fearless Frank

Horrific and harrowing accounts of the atrocities that haunt Congo - and Darfur, in Sudan - surface in the news from time to time. Yet this catalogue of depravity doesn't seem to have a place in the international spotlight.
Reports of these appalling crimes tend to describe the perpetrators as "rebel militia", terms which lend a sort of legitimacy to what appear to be gangs of marauding psychopaths.
Is there a purposeful and focused campaign to end this horror? If there is, it will have my support.

Michael B

The moral blindness???

Make that a willful and contented moral blindness. Liberia is little better and it too is almost entirely ignored by the Christiane Amanpours and others of the DLLEM.

(dominant left/liberal establishment media)

kiran

I am sure that the victims of brutality in Congo will be reassured to know that they are safe from Western Cultural Imperialism. They probably have a special prayer of thanks for the Western Intelligentsia that shows such respect for their way of life.

David Bouvier

Alex Bensky - on the specific point of Kuwaiti expulsions of Palestinians after "The First Gulf War" (actually, after the occupation of their country by Iraq) you might want to take into account that the PLO/A supported Saddam's invasion (big mistake in funding terms in hindsight) and a lot of resident Palestinians collaborated with the invaders (as did a lot of long-term resident Iraqi's many of whom were even married to Kuwaitis.)
The kinds of things that were done were leading the Iraqi around Kuwait city and using their local knowledge to find and turn-in people in hiding - colleagues, even family.

There was and is a huge trauma in Kuwaiti society over what their "fellow Arabs" did then, and a huge relief that they had not granted citizenship to the Iraqi immigrants.

I don't see why they should not expel these people in those circumstances.

And it really is nothing to do with the topic at hand.

G McG

I see my comment from yesterday, pointing out your mistake in confusing "The Congo" (country) with "Congo" (region) has not been published, possibly because of a technical glitch.

Just to point out again, that Amnesty has done numerous reports on the human rights abuses associated with the horrific civil war in the Democratic Republic of Congo, which can be found here on the Amnesty International website, if you look for them.

And it's a rather amusing coincidence that they have today released a new report on the persecution of human rights activists in the DRC, which you can find on the Amnesty Internatioanl or Amnesty UK website.

In addition, Evelyn Gordon makes a mistake in her report of how many times Amnesty has raised issues relating to Israel in 2010 (she counted a press release and webpage news story as two separate items and ignored Amnesty's criticisms of Hamas).

I suggest that in future you check your facts before making such claims.

Sergey

The only welcome use of human right notion during Cold War was exactly cultural imperialism, when Communist regimes who did not subscribed to the western standards of human rights, were, nevertheless, held accountable for their violations. Cultural imperialism is the only virtue and justification of this notion, and when it is abandoned, the reason to support this movent evaporates.
The best achievements of Western civilization are also associated with cultural imperialism: worldwide ban on slave trade, imposed by British Navy, was nothing else but cultural imperialism in its extreme, and the most laudable use of it.

Australians for Non-Bigoted Thinking

HUMAN NATURE IS THE SAME UNIVERSALLY:

What people forget is that human nature is fundamentally the same universally, and by its very nature is prone to weakness and is opportunistic, irrespective of cultural and genetic differences.

The minute that you excuse a person's actions under the guise of moral relativism, moral equivalence, 'racism' and 'sexism' is the minute you give refuge to the scoundrel.

Augustus

The UN peacekeepers in DR Congo
(MONUC), which comprises of over 25,000 soldiers, and costs $1bn per year, is incapable of protecting civilian lives there where many millions have died and been tortured in the crossfire. The humanitarian crisis is caused by the engagement of not only the government forces (FARDC), but also the various rebellious militia groups. Monuc is supposed to both protect the civilians, as well as giving support to the FARDC against the rebels. The conflict in the Eastern regions of North and South Kivu involves various groups fighting for control of the rich gold and mineral resources in the region. Not only are Congolese factions involved, but also neighbouring countries, as well as China, Russia and the West are all partly to blame for the crisis.
There are military bigwigs in the FARDC who deliver weapons to
the Hutu rebels of FDLR who they are supposed to be opposing. The FDLR and other groups rule the areas in the East where gold, coltan and cassiterite are mined. Neighbouring countries such as Burundi, Uganda, and Tanzania make the illegal export of the materials possible, and the illegal delivery of weapons to rebel forces By China and Russia
continues apace. Germany and France don't do enough to break the communications between the rebels and their various leaders who live there in exile.
Ever since the days of Belgian King Leopold II in the 1880s, the extremely rich resources of the Congo have made citizens of that country vulnerable to terrible abuse and violence, and the world's continued and increasing demand for those riches will only make matters worse before they ever improve.

Dixon

Isaac Bickerstaff
February 16th, 2010 3:00pm
" The picture by Blake is no doubtapposite. Did Blake not intend it as an illustration of the atrocities we in Europe and America have built our prosperity upon - atrocities against what would no doubt be called here "non-white" people. - What does our silence about the history of atrocities tell us about our "cultural relativism"?

Silence! You've got to be kidding! In Bristol there is AN ENTIRE MUSEUM, VAST AND PUBLICLY FUNDED, devoted to the British role in slavery. The British media never, ever, ever, for five effin minutes stop blabbin about what an evil bunch of tyrannical demons up out of hell "our" ( not mine ) slave-dealing ancestors were!

Just what planet is this Isaac bloke on?

blue_&_white_avenger

Hi David Bouvier
February 17th, 2010 10:36am. Just to add to what you've written. Apart from Kuwait expelling all their Palestinians, who viewed SH as their saviour, Saudia A also expelled their Palestinians. As far as I know that amounted to well over 1/2 M (there's some in London for example). They added to UNWRA's "refugee" count & the affect was double: rather than them supplying ££ to the Palestinian economy via expat. input, they added to the drain on UNWRA's resources - funded principally by Uncle Sam & with a small 3% contribution from the poverty-stricken Arab states. In Arabia, blood definitely ain't thicker than water.

Ian Miller

Far more is written about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict than about Congo for the same reason that there are orders of magnitude more articles written about evolution than about electro-magnetic field theory. This has nothing whatever to do with the relative merits or importance of the fields. The reason is that evolution has a vocal and well-funded lobby trying to rubbish it, which many people believe needs to be countered. EMF-theory is under attack, so isn't defended.

Similarly the dire state of the Congo is well known and entirely undisputed. These descriptions of the atrocities will not lead to the publication of rebuttals or the libelling of their authors as bigots.

By contrast any criticism of Israel will provoke an immediate vituperative reaction. Israel is not discussed so much because it is the worst human rights abuser; it isn't by a long way. It is discussed as much as it, because of the extraordinary claims made for its virtue and the number of apologists stridently making those claims.

There is the old saying
"Dog bites man isn't news; man bites dog is news".
By the same token
"failed state kills masses of civilians isn't news; civilised democratic state kills any civilians is news".

Michael B

Isaac Bickerstaff,

William Blake, in the words of Owen Barfield, among others, was a genuinely great if too often confused commentator. The telling irony is, your own comment reflects the very type of late modern idolatry both Blake and Barfield were attempting to illuminate. There is additional and still telling irony in the fact that it was Marx and Engels who suggested - nearly a century before the rise of Hitler, Stalin and Mao, et al. - that multiplied millions of peoples, due to their backwardness, would need to be exterminated. (I.e. your own comment, obviously enough, reflects an all too typical Marxian post-colonial analysis and set of assumptions. Foregoing any comment on the DRC or Sudan or Liberia, how's it going in "liberated" Zimbabwe, for example? Or even So. Africa, where gang rapes by young men under twenty is epidemic throughout that society, in fact is considered a common rite of passage?)

(See Barfield's "Saving the Appearances: a study in [late modern] idolatry")

Julie Morin

Thank you for this article. It is important that the facts about Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are made available to the public. Unfortunately, all an organization needs to do is label themselves a human rights group to win respect and followers. The biased nature of these groups must continuously be exposed.

Voortrekker

At bottom, all these ivory tower liberals do not care about Africa.

And neither do Africans/Africam-Americans/Afro-caribbeans.

Isaac Bickerstaff

Dixon,
You are quite right - it was very silly of me to use the word "silence". I too have read the standard histories of our glorious empire, and Belgium's, and France's, etc.

More informative than any theme park or tourist museum as an epitome of the attitude of the haves to how they got what they have is the story of Haiti over the last two centuries. I gather it is of no interest to you, but that is another matter. And my first comment was already straying from the point of the blog.

Of course, nothing can mitigate the guilt of the barbarians in the Congo, but in a glass house I suppose we should think of solutions, not about apportioning blame.

Isaac Bickerstaff

Michael b.
I truly do not have a clue what you are talking about. Sorry.

Eulette

I refer you to Amnesty's report published on Weds 17 February calling on the DRC Government to protect human rights defenders, who continue to be arbitrarily detained by the county’s security agencies and subjected to death threats.

http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=18625

ginger

It should not be forgotten that many atrocities in Africa are perpetuated by the natives of a country
to their own kind, and not always by outsiders.
I'm inclined to think now that each country should sort itself out as best it can.

Ed

Here's Amnesty's latest report on the Democratic Republic of Congo published the day after this misleading article:

http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=18625

Michael B

Isaac, I was aware of that fact.

Isaac Bickerstaff

Michael B.,

Do you?

guy herbert

I think the explanation for the bias is simpler than ideological avocation. State terror works.

It is safer and easier to investigate the conduct of countries where there is a free press and the rule of law is generally respected. In Syria (or even Jordan) a witness talking to a human rights worker risks themselves or their family members being picked up by the secret police. Not the case in Israel. That doesn't make Israel innocent of anything it is accused of, but it is why it is more often accused.

Isaac Bickerstaff

Michael B.
No, seriously, what could the following possibly mean?

"The telling irony is, your own comment reflects the very type of late modern idolatry both Blake and Barfield were attempting to illuminate. There is additional and still telling irony in the fact that it was Marx and Engels who suggested - nearly a century before the rise of Hitler, Stalin and Mao, et al. - that multiplied millions of peoples, due to their backwardness, would need to be exterminated. (I.e. your own comment, obviously enough, reflects an all too typical Marxian post-colonial analysis and set of assumptions."

What on earth are you on about? You must share it with us.

Mrs.Josephine Hyde-Hartley

It strikes me there's so much trouble in this world because it's so easy to think one knows something better than others can know it. Perhaps it'd be more realistic to slow down and think in terms of knowing something differently instead - with a view to open and inclusive dialogue.This way important organisations might be able to acheive or otherwise benefit from (inherit?) better communication in desperately difficult circumstances. Mud slinging doesn't do justice to anybody.

Marcus

And here is the link to Human Rights Watch's extensive pages on the Democratic Republic of Congo:

http://www.hrw.org/en/africa/democratic-republic-congo

Henry Sidgwick

ADAM B. told me that this thread reveals that what he calls the "Israel bashing lobby" criticises Israel inordinately and that the "ONLY" reason is anti-semitism...okay, maybe it wasn't this thread...

Ed

Amnesty International is a surprisingly amateurish organisation, and its members tend to go with whatever is in the media at any point. On the other hand, Human Rights Watch has professional researchers monitoring different corners of the globe. This is why HRW is better at covering conflicts that are not well known in the mainstream media.

Ed

Ed - In what way is it amateurish? There is plenty of staff on the Congo on their website. Despite Melanie's misleading post, there were numerous statements on the DRC last year. This post merely demonstrates a distinct inability to search the internet correctly.

diana

i always think of it this way, if a civilian was murdered by an act of political terror, and the BBC didn't report it, did it happen?

Paul Halsall

The Guardian article makes your comments a complete FAIL.