But HRW does “pick on Israel” (Reply to Peggy Hicks; Washington Post)
In an oped “A Shadow on the Human Rights Movement” published in the Washington Post on June 25, Jackson Diehl, showed that NGO Monitor’s message is getting through. Diehl, a senior journalist who cannot be accused of being soft on Israel, condemned the hypocrisy of the UN Human Rights Council and NGOs that are part of the system. Diehl wrote: “What about Western human rights groups — surely they cannot accept such a travesty of human rights advocacy? In fact, they can. While critical of the council, New York-based Human Rights Watch said its procedural decisions ‘lay a foundation for its future work.’ Global advocacy director Peggy Hicks told me that the council’s focus on Israel was in part appropriate, because of last year’s war in Lebanon, and was in part caused by Israel itself, because of its refusal to cooperate with missions the council dispatched. (Sudan also refused to cooperate but was not rebuked.) …Is there a point at which a vicious and unfounded campaign to delegitimize one country — which happens to be populated mostly by Jews — makes it unconscionable to collaborate with the body that conducts it? ‘That could happen, but I don’t think we’re anywhere near there,’ Hicks said.”
In a letter to the editor (unlikely ordinary folks, letters signed by HRW officials are always published), Hicks tried to defend HRW, claiming, against all the evidence that “We Don’t Pick on Israel”. The only substantiation she could offer was HRW’s belated statement criticizing the Council’s “selective treatment of Israel”. Rewriting the record, she erased numerous statements and campaigns that have implicated HRW deeply in this demonization and exploitation of human rights. Last year, HRW officials, led by Ken Roth, condemned the US and Israeli governments for warning that the proposed reform of the UN Human Rights system would perpetuate the political abuses. And as shown in NGO Monitor’s detailed analysis of HRW’s agenda and distribution of resources in the Middle East, the obsessive focus on Israel continues. In 2006, as in past years, the reports (often based on local “eyewitnesses” with no credibility), press conferences, and campaigns against Israel were far more visible than HRW’s attempts to press for human rights in the Middle East dictatorships.
In his column, Diehl concluded sadly: “That’s the human rights movement, seven years into a century that’s off to a bad start.” And self-righteous denials not withstanding, officials of HRW are very much responsible for this moral failure.
Gerald Steinberg
Executive Director, NGO Monitor
June 29, 2007
well said!