Showing posts with label Human Rights NGO's. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Human Rights NGO's. Show all posts

Thursday, May 9, 2013

When human rights is more than the NGO's name

...Receiving awards should be a happy time. However, in a way, this is a sad moment. It is sad because while the cause of human rights has advanced so much in many ways since I started with Helsinki Watch 35 years ago, in some parts of the world, human rights have barely advanced at all, and in some ways, the cause of human rights is actually moving in the wrong direction. In the short time allotted to me today, let me say a few words about one part of the human rights situation in the Middle East, and perhaps, what you as graduates of this great institution can do about it.

NGO Monitor..
Robert L. Bernstein..
May 02, 2013..
Hebrew Union College..

Robert L. Bernstein's remarks upon receiving the Dr. Bernard Heller Prize

Let me begin by thanking Hebrew Union College for giving me the Dr. Bernard Heller Award. When I was asked whether or not I would accept the award, I was given a list of past recipients, and I am certainly pleased to be on such a distinguished list.

Many years ago, I was given a quotation in a handsome frame, which said: “There is no limit to the good a person can do if he or she doesn’t care who gets the credit.” It has hung on my wall for many years, and I like to think that I believe it.

However, in my later years — I am now 90 — I have to admit that it is challenged by a line that creeps into my mind, which goes: “There seems to be no limit to the amount of praise I can’t get accustomed to.” So here I am.

My guess is that I was chosen for this award partly because I founded a successful organization called Human Rights Watch, was its Chair for the first 20 years of its now 34 year-life, and am still a member of the organization, serving as Founding Chair Emeritus. And, because, in October, 2009, I wrote an op-ed in the New York Times in which I argued that Human Rights Watch was wrongly painting Israel as a pariah state in its reports on the Israel-Palestine conflict. And, more recently, I have established and been the chair of Advancing Human Rights, a new human rights organization, which focuses primarily on using the Internet to foster the spread of human rights.

Receiving awards should be a happy time. However, in a way, this is a sad moment. It is sad because while the cause of human rights has advanced so much in many ways since I started with Helsinki Watch 35 years ago, in some parts of the world, human rights have barely advanced at all, and in some ways, the cause of human rights is actually moving in the wrong direction.

In the short time allotted to me today, let me say a few words about one part of the human rights situation in the Middle East, and perhaps, what you as graduates of this great institution can do about it.

Three hundred million Arabs do not enjoy freedom of speech. Half of them, 150 million, as women, not only lack freedom of speech, but have barely any rights at all. And the private rights of how to pray and how to love are wrongly dictated by governments, all across the Arab World. Three years ago, we witnessed what was called the Arab Spring. Dictators who had oppressed their own people — and deceived them by telling them that Jews and Israel’s very existence were one of the primary causes of their misery — were toppled. It was a time for human rights organizations and governmental organizations to try to push for these rights long denied, with the hopes that they would take some root. One might have hoped, too, that it was also a time for human rights organizations to tell the people living in Arab countries that their governments not only misled them about their own rights, but also falsely portrayed Israel as a threat and an enemy to detract attention from their plight. Sadly, they did not do this. And the reason, in my opinion, is because of where many in the human rights community have placed their emphasis in recent years.

In my opinion, over the last few years, many in the human rights field have steadily retreated from upholding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Instead of focusing on insuring basic human rights for all citizens across the Arab world and in other closed societies, they have waded into the muddle of trying to become experts in the laws of warfare, deciding what constitutes a legitimate act of war and what does not, what should be considered a war crime and what should not. The result is that human rights organizations are trying to act like a referee at a sports event, calling war crimes of both sides. They come across like a group of litigator lawyers playing a game of “Gotcha!” mostly with the Israeli Defense Forces and occasionally with Hamas, Hezbollah, and from time to time, Iran.

Wednesday, April 3, 2013

To B’Tselem's Michaeli and Haaretz's Levy - An Open Letter

Times of Israel..







From Maurice Ostroff

April 2, 2013

Dear Sarit Michaeli and Gideon Levy

I am writing to seek your advice.

In the March 31 Jerusalem Post article “IDF releases video of Hebron kids throwing stones” you, (Ms. Michaeli) are quoted as saying

“Even if they [minors under 12] are throwing stones, they cannot be arrested.. there are other ways to deal with children that throw stones“.[emphasis added]

And Mr. Levy, there is a serious contradiction in your Haaretz article under the headline “Aged eight, wearing a Mickey Mouse sweatshirt, and placed in Israeli custody“. which first states that the arrests were made INDISCRIMINATELY and later states that when handed over to the Palestinian police and asked who had participated in the stone throwing all raised their hands in affirmative, from which it is obvious that the arrests were NOT INDISCRIMINATE

Similarly, the allegation on B’Tselem’s web site that there was mass detention of youths for unspecified suspicions is highly irresponsible and unsustainable.

More importantly, the Israelis showed due consideration to the ages of the youths. As you point out, most of the young children were released within a few hours and handed over to the Palestinian police who called the parents to come and collect them.

Not only I, but I’m sure the Israel government and the IDF would be very grateful to learn your secret about how to effectively deal with hate-indoctrinated kids who hurl rocks and stones like those thrown last Thursday at a car near Ariel, critically injuring an Israeli mother and her baby who is still fighting for her life as well as the rocks that injured another motorist on the same day near Na’alin.

I was initially alarmed when I saw the headline on B’Tselem web site “Mass arrest of Palestinian children on their way to school..” fearing that “mass” meant huge numbers but I was relieved to learn that 27 were arrested and that of these only seven were actually held for questioning, none of whom were minors and I hope you will agree that in the circumstances the description “mass arrests” by both B’Tselem and Levy is an unjustified inciting exaggeration..

Thursday, October 18, 2012

Ireland's NGO Funding - Carrying on a long tradition of anti-Israel bias

The Irish government is either oblivious to Trócaire’s extensive anti-peace activities, or knowingly carrying on a long tradition of anti-Israel bias.

Alex Ryvchin..
Op-Ed Contributor/JPost..
17 October '12..

This week, officials from Ireland are traveling to Israel for high-level talks. At the top of the agenda should be the damaging policies conducted by Trócaire, one of the major recipients of Irish taxpayer largesse.

Founded by the Bishops of Ireland, Trócaire is the official overseas development agency of the Catholic Church in Ireland and a major recipient of funds from Irish Aid with an annual budget of some ¤56 million.

In contrast to the humanitarian label, Trócaire is also a major contributor to and unwitting participant in the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.

Amid the organization’s materials showing impoverished African children and grateful aid recipients from the third world are political attacks in the form of calls to boycott Israeli products from the West Bank. In a recent op-ed in the Irish Times, Trócaire’s executive director, Justin Kilcullen, urged Ireland to adopt a total ban on “illegal settlement goods” and to “push European counterparts for similar action.”

Beyond the central moral issue raised by an aid organization interceding politically in a complex and multifaceted conflict, Trócaire’s role as a key enabler of anti-Israel campaigns raises important questions. If boycotts are a legitimate means of influencing the policies of foreign governments, why is there no call to boycott Syria following the deaths of tens of thousands of people in Assad’s bloody war against his own people? And why is there no Trocaire-led boycott of China, or of many other countries plagued by violent attacks and terrorism. In fact, why is Israel the only country that Trócaire targets in the entire Middle East?

Another UNESCO NGO Contribution Towards A Better World

ALU grants highest ever honor to Palestinian woman who carried out the 2003 suicide bombing at Maxim's Restaurant in Haifa.

LOTL..
18 October '12..








From the UNESCO Homepage for Non-governmental organizations and foundations

Since its inception, UNESCO has recognized that non-governmental organizations and foundations which have concerns close to its own play an important role in international cooperation in the service of peoples.

For more than a half-century, UNESCO has set up a valuable network of cooperative relations with a number of organizations in its fields of competence, thereby enabling it to work with civil society in achieving its objectives and to disseminate its democratic and ethical ideals.

Currently, UNESCO is enjoying official partnerships with 368 international NGOs and 22 foundations and similar institutions which are working in the fields of competence of the Organization. In addition to this formal framework, the Organization has been carrying out a range of activities hand in hand with NGOs, not only at international and regional levels, but also at national level.

For example:

ARAB LAWYERS' UNION (ALU)

Aims:
ALU is a pan-Arab confederation of bar associations and law societies.

Mission :
To develop the profession of lawyer in the Arabic countries to make it a true auxiliary of justice
To work for the independence of the judiciary power
Contribute to the development of the law and to the unification of laws and legal nomenclature in Arab countries
Promote and protect human rights, basic freedoms and the primacy of law
Participate in the decolonization of the Arab Countries, to their liberation and the establishment of social justice

For Example:

Arab Lawyers Union honors Palestinian suicide bomber
By KHALED ABU TOAMEH 10/13/2012

ALU grants highest ever honor to Palestinian woman who carried out the 2003 suicide bombing at Maxim's Restaurant in Haifa.

The Arab Lawyers Union on Friday awarded its highest decoration to the Palestinian woman who carried out the 2003 suicide bombing at Maxim’s Restaurant in Haifa, which killed 21 and wounded 51. The Cairo-based union, which represents lawyers from 15 Arab countries, dispatched a delegation to the home of suicide bomber Hanadi Jaradat in Jenin to present her family with the award.

Ayman Abu Eisheh, a member of the Palestine Committee at the ALU, said the decision to honor the female suicide bomber was taken during a meeting in Cairo last month. Abu Eisheh, a lawyer who visited the family, said the Arab lawyers were proud of what Jaradat did “in defense of Palestine and the Arab nation.”
He said that the delegation relayed to the family greetings from the head of the ALU, Omar al-Zein, and head of the Palestine Committee, Sayed Abdel Ghani.

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

(Video) NGO Monitor - Justice and Human Rights Denied:

Five Years of NGO Silence on Shalit

NGO Monitor
17 October '11


Since June 25, 2006, when Gilad Shalit’s captivity began, NGOs that claim a human rights mandate have demonstrated little interest in Shalit’s human rights. Organizations such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN), B’Tselem, Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, Gisha, and Association for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI) did not conduct sustained campaigns on his behalf. Gilad Shalit was simply not a priority for these NGOs.

Instead, they used this issue to condemn Israeli responses to terror from Gaza. Their statements immorally equated Shalit, who was illegally held incommunicado and without access to the International Red Cross, and Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli prisoners according to international legal standards.

Prof. Gerald Steinberg interviewed on the IBA English News October 17, 2011 about the 
Gilad Shalit prisoner deal and the utter failure of Human Rights NGOs during Shalit's
 5 years in a Hamas prison.

Uploaded by NgoMonitor on Oct 17, 2011

In turn, international institutions, such as the Red Cross and the UN Human Rights Council did not devote enough resources to the blatant violations of Shalit’s rights. In fact, while Shalit was held in Gaza without access to the Red Cross, the Red Cross sheltered Hamas officials in its East Jerusalem offices for more than a year, in violation of the organization’s alleged mandate of political neutrality. Similarly, the Goldstone Report, which was primarily based on NGO documents and lobbying, downplayed Shalit’s captivity.

In addition, NGOs have not condemned the immoral extortion exacted by Hamas on Israel, resulting in freedom for hundreds of terrorists, including murderers serving life sentences, who were tried and convicted according to due process of law. Aside from adding to incentives for future attacks against civilians, the use of Gilad Shalit as a hostage to force the release of individuals who have not completed their sentences seriously undermines international legal principles and promotes impunity for heinous crimes.

Instead, Gisha wrote, “We join in...of course the relief felt by the Shalit family and the families of the prisoners who will be released,” (emphasis added); Adalah, Al Mezan, and Arab Association for Human Rights “consider the release of 1,027 Palestinian and Arab prisoners from Israeli prisons a positive step” (emphasis added); Shawan Jabarin of Al Haq claimed that “This transfer and deportation of protected persons goes against the Geneva Conventions...This latest deportation is just another step in Israel’s policy to drive Palestinians out...[The Israeli] philosophy behind that is that if you live outside, you won't come back and you will take your family with you”; and the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) released a statement entitled “Closure of Gaza Must Be Lifted as Shalit’s Pretext Diminished.”

(Read full "Justice and Human Rights Denied")

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Thursday, October 13, 2011

NGO Monitor - Shalit Agreement Shows Moral Failure of International Human Rights Frameworks

NGO Monitor
October 12, 2011



http://www.ngomonitor.org/article/shalit_agreement_shows_moral_failure_of_international_human_rights_frameworks

JERUSALEM – While welcoming the agreement to release kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit as an important humanitarian act, Professor Gerald M. Steinberg, president of human rights watchdog NGO Monitor, noted that this episode further exposes the moral bankruptcy of international human rights mechanisms.

“Throughout the five years of Shalit’s captivity in Gaza, during which every human rights obligation was blatantly violated, organizations such as the UN Human Rights Council, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN), Gisha, and the International Red Cross demonstrated very little interest,” Steinberg stated. “Similarly, the report of the UN Fact-Finding Commission on the Gaza War, headed by Judge Richard Goldstone, downplayed Shalit’s captivity in blatant violation of international law. This moral stain will never be erased.”

In addition, NGO Monitor noted that the agreement to release hundreds of terrorists, responsible for heinous crimes, and tried and convicted according to due process of law, highlights the continued erosion of international legal principles. Instead of serving their time for these convictions, the murderers have been freed under extreme duress and compulsion, adding to the incentives for similar actions in the future. Organizations dedicated to human rights have an obligation to condemn such immoral extortion.

For NGO Monitor’s detailed reports on the neglect of Shalit by human rights groups, see:

Gilad Shalit Marks 24th Birthday Still in Captivity, August 27, 2010

NGOs, Universal Human Rights and Gilad Shalit: Four Years of Double Standards, July 1, 2010

NGO Monitor: HRW Statement on Gilad Shalit Better Late Than Never, June 25, 2009

Letter to Haaretz: NGO Silence on Gilad Shalit, May 6, 2009

Betrayed by Silence: NGOs Ignore Gilad Shalit’s Rights, March 26, 2009

Only B’Tselem Notes One-year Anniversary of Gilad Shalit’s Captivity, July 2, 2007

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Monday, July 5, 2010

NGOs, Universal Human Rights and Gilad Shalit: Four Years of Double Standards


NGO Monitor
01 July '10

For most of the four years since the kidnapping of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, most human rights NGOs have ignored his situation. Shalit was taken from Israeli territory on June 25, 2006 and has since been held captive in Gaza without access to the International Committee of the Red Cross, in direct contravention of the Geneva Convention.

On the fourth anniversary of Shalit’s capture, most of these NGOs continued their silence. The exceptions were Human Rights Watch (HRW), B’Tselem, and the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI): HRW and PCATI called for Hamas to allow access to Shalit, while B’Tselem called for his release. Amnesty International, which was initially active, to a limited degree, on the Shalit issue, was silent.

HRW

In addition to releasing a statement in both 2009 and 2010 on the anniversary of Shalit’s capture, HRW has mentioned Shalit in several press releases, but has not engaged in any significant campaign.

(Read full report)

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Precision-guided or Indiscriminate? NGO Reporting on Compliance with the Laws of Armed Conflict


Asher Fredman
NGO Monitor Monograph Series
28 June '10

International human rights NGOs are playing an increasingly influential role in shaping the policies of states and international institutions. Decision-makers, media and the public frequently turn to NGOs such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch for perspective on international events. Yet despite the growing importance of these NGOs, few scholars have subjected the content of their reports to critical scrutiny.

This monograph analyzes the output of two of the most powerful NGOs, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, regarding the 2008-2009 conflict in Gaza and southern Israel. Their factual and legal claims, particularly relating to Israel's use of White Phosphorus and UAVs, are considered in light of military sources, state doctrine, and the academic literature.

The analysis demonstrates that many of the factual claims made by the NGOs are contradicted by military sources, weapons experts, and media reports. From the legal perspective it is shown that their presentation of key aspects of international law is inaccurate or incomplete. This suggests that these NGOs should carefully evaluate their areas of competency, and take steps to ensure that ideological biases do not affect their work. Policy- and opinion-makers should carefully examine NGO reports before allowing them to influence their positions.

PDF of the full report

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.