Where Was Amnesty International During the Genocide in Gaza?

 Where Was Amnesty International During the Genocide in Gaza?

Paul de Rooij 

Israel is genociding the Palestinians one neighborhood at the time, one hospital at the time, one school at the time, one refugee camp at the time, one ‘safe zone’ at the time

— Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur oPt,

10 August 2024

One would expect that human rights organisations would spring into action during an impending or unfolding genocide — the ultimate violation of human rights. Maybe human rights NGOs actions should be proportional to the level of the crimes they are concerned with. Thus, the more killing, torture, arbitrary imprisonment, bombing…, etc., that is plainly evident, the more action one would expect. So, what is the output of some of the leading human rights organisations in the face of the genocide in Gaza? Below is an analysis of Amnesty International’s press releases and announced actions[1]

.

Will they come clean?

First things first. To assess the credibility of any organisation, one should know their relationship with Israel and the United States — both participants in the unfolding genocide. On this account, Amnesty International has never come clean about its relationship with the Israeli government. Uri Blau, a Haaretz investigative journalist, recently revealed that Amnesty_Intl.-Israel was taken over and run by Israeli operatives paid for by the Foreign Ministry.[2]







 They ran interference in reporting on the situation in the occupied territories, participated in conferences, and even set up a “human rights” institute at Tel Aviv university. This was a nice way to co-opt the human rights industry. The principal who ran AI-Israel even gave an interview boasting of his exploits.

And did AI-Israel have a hand editing any Amnesty reports about the situation in the occupied territories or its many wars in the region? Some Palestinian lawyers reported having problematic encounters with AI-Israel officials, to the extent that they refused to have any dealings with it thereafter. One could well imagine AI-Israel officials reporting on Palestinians who reached out to them. So how ethical is it for Amnesty International to expose Palestinians contacting AI-Israel to imminent danger? When will Amnesty International acknowledge this dirty relationship and ensure that it maintains the requisite distance from the Israeli government in the future?

The genocide will be televised

Next, one must establish if what we witness amounts to a genocide. Craig Mokhiber, the former UN official in the High Commission for Human Rights, resigned because his agency was not reacting given the unfolding situation in Gaza, and stated in his resignation letter; “this is a textbook case of genocide”. NB: the letter was submitted on 28 October 2023. Mokhiber stated that it is usually difficult to establish whether a genocide is taking place because one doesn’t know the motivation of the leading military and political leadership.[3]

 In the current context, there is no doubt about the motivation; one only has to listen to Netanyahu, Gallant, Ganz, Smotrich, Ben Gvir… And also most of the parliamentarians — they made genocidal statements in the Knesset; they were competing with each other to see who would be most truculent.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) statement on the case brought in front of the court by South Africa also suggests that we are witnessing a genocide — at least most of the justices urged Israeli action to forestall a genocide.

Gaza is one of the most densely populated areas in the world, and in particular, the refugee camps exhibit a high population density. The Israeli military is bombing these locations using huge bombs recently delivered by 500+ of American military cargo planes.[4]

 There is no doubt about this, one can even witness the bombing realtime on Al Jazeera. Civilians are directed to evacuate areas only to be bombed in locations that had been putatively named “safe areas,” hospitals, schools, UN compounds, etc. Fleeing civilians were targeted; all bakeries were destroyed; hundreds of wells destroyed; scores of chicken farms ravaged; entire families wiped out…. Thus it is not only the level of killing, but also the destruction of life-sustaining infrastructure that is happening now. The weaponry is very accurate, thus the targeting was done intentionally; so it is not an issue of “collateral damage,” but it is intentional and indiscriminate targeting. A principle of International humanitarian law is that actions should be proportionate, but Israeli military and politicians revel at the disproportionate nature of the destruction; it is the Dahiya doctrine applied to Gaza.[5] This doctrine refers to the disproportionate violence perpetrated against the Lebanese population in the Dahiya neighbourhood in Beirut in 2006; the neighbourhood was entirely flattened with huge bombs. Alastair Crooke, the former British diplomat, summarises the situation succinctly: “Gaza is already a monument to callous inhumanity and suffering. It will get worse…”[6]

One thing is certain: if it quacks like a duck, waddles like a duck, then it is genocide.[7] Under these circumstances, one would expect all human rights organisations to spring into action and demand court actions, UN Security Council resolutions, calls for key officials to be held accountable for crimes against humanity, and for the US, UK, Germany… and others to stop enabling Israel’s genocidal actions.

Nature of coverage

A few things are evident when reviewing AI’s press releases: one is struck by the paucity of coverage, the trite and generic form of statements, the unwillingness to call out the nature of some crimes, and unwillingness to debunk some of the crass Israeli propaganda meant to further de-humanise the Palestinians, and to justify Israel’s crimes.

Since 7 October 2023, there have only been 60 press releases — none of any substance. One is struck also that there are a number of press releases about Israel/OPT that don’t mention the ongoing genocide at all![8]



. Or the commentary is part of a discussion of human rights in general.

Ahistorical

Gaza has been subject to numerous massacres — several not even registering in the media accounts in the so-called West. There were several of the post-2006 attacks (aka “mowing the lawn” operations) usually referred to by their Israeli sugar-coated operation names. After each such operation AI dutifully produced its trite reports, but was rather circumspect in calling out Israeli crimes; and whenever it did issue a statement about a particular crime, it was immediately offset by references to Palestinian crimes.

A good historical starting point to assess the current violations of international humanitarian law would be the Goldstone report (2008) — which documented and established serious Israeli crimes during “Operation Cast Lead”[9]. Alas, one is struck by the ahistorical nature of AI’s press releases and reports. It is as if history started yesterday, but then this is the nature of the “rights-based reporting,” where there is virtually no reference to history. When it suits Amnesty it will ignore history.[10] Would one’s assessment of a criminal be altered by the fact that he was a serial criminal? If so, then it behooves AI to emphasise Israel’s long history of mass crimes against the Palestinian population. But acknowledging the long history of dispossession and brutality against the native population would suggest that “we” should be in solidarity with the Palestinians. Alas, that is not a position Amnesty is willing to take. It prefers to utter its clucking sounds, and admonish “both sides” as if there were a moral equivalence between the violence perpetrated by oppressor and oppressed.

False balance

Amnesty wants to appear impartial, and clamours for both Palestinian and Israeli rights. Thus AI will issue a report outlining some of the Israeli crimes, but will then issue a report on the “Palestinian war crimes”. In general, according to AI, most of the actions perpetrated by the Palestinians are ipso facto war crimes; there is no need for further investigation or discussion. A disgraceful example is an article discussing Palestinian war crimes published on 12 July 2024. Thus after more than nine months of bombings, maybe 186,000+ dead[11]

, calculated starvation, summary executions and evidence of rampant mistreatment of Palestinian prisoners… Amnesty chose to demand the release of the Israeli hostages! According to Erika Guevara Rosas, AI’s “Senior Director for Research, Advocacy, Policy and Campaigns,” holding Israeli civilian hostages is a war crime.[12] Lost in this narrative is an explanation as to why the hostages are held — they are the only means to obtain the release of some of the thousands of Palestinian prisoners. And true to form, a few days later AI released a longish press release critical of the Israeli brutal treatment of prisoners. Producing reports critical of “both sides” are attempts to claim impartiality.

Amnesty ignores the 1960 UNGA resolution acknowledging the right for an oppressed/colonised population to defend themselves — this includes armed struggle; and that Israel has an obligation to protect the oppressed population. The nature of the violence suggests that it is not possible to assume a “neutral” position. Thus, Amnesty’s proclivity to admonish “both sides” is ethically suspect.

Not countering Israeli propaganda

One useful function AI could play would be to debunk Israeli propaganda meant to dehumanise Palestinians to serve as a pretext for its genocidal campaign. The day after the Palestinian incursion, the Israeli propaganda machine was ready to push stories about rapes, babies cooked in microwave ovens, brutal murders, and so on. However, Amnesty has not countered these fabricated stories; in fact it has helped propagate the Israeli narrative. For example, it repeatedly referred to the 7 October attack as “horrific” — a term almost exclusively used to describe Palestinian actions. It doesn’t account for the fact that it was the Israeli military who killed more than half the Israeli civilians on that day.[13]







 There were no babies cooked to death or impaled on bayonets. Alas, even with a pompous sounding “Evidence Investigation Unit,” Amnesty doesn’t seem to care to separate facts from hateful slander. If the latter is meant to dehumanise the Palestinians, then exposing this propaganda would go some way to humanise the victim. It seems that that is not in Amnesty’s purview.

In the press release demanding the release of Israeli hostages, Erika Guevara Rosas stated: “Israel’s brutal assault on Gaza that has resulted in the death of over 38,000 Palestinians”. This is factually correct, but contextually challenged. Guevara is using the Palestinian Health ministry’s figures that are based on the actual recovery of bodies; it misses all the victims under the rubble. The Lancet study estimates that about 8% of the Gazan population has been killed — that is in the order of 186,000 dead. Furthermore, the deaths attributable to epidemics, starvation, etc., are also missed in the Health Ministry’s statistics. The London School of Hygiene and Johns Hopkins University have attempted to estimate this mortality rate.[14]

. Their estimates and methodology are complex, and it is best to read it directly from their reports. Suffice it to say that the mortality rate has increased dramatically.

Maybe a clearer explanation of the available statistics would be in order.

Lets investigate!

There are plenty of daily criminal attacks, but it is only the particularly outrageous ones when AI feels compelled to utter some comment. The discovery of mass burial sites near hospitals that had recently been invaded by the Israeli military elicited some commentary[15]. Instead of pointing a finger at Israel, and suggesting serious crimes had been perpetrated, it instead calls for an “independent investigation”. If only AI’s sanctimonious investigators could enter the scene, then one could establish what really happened. The other implication of AI’s call for investigation is that it doesn’t value the voice of the victims of Israeli crimes. Thus it is not up to Palestinians to call out their oppressor, but some “independent” body has to take its jolly good time determining whether a crime was committed; a report will follow a few years later. In the meantime, all Israeli crimes are merely “alleged” crimes.

There is a more problematic aspect to AI’s call for investigations, namely, that it is giving credence to Israeli exculpatory claims and justifications for its attacks. Thus bombing the Al Shifa hospital was justified on the spurious grounds that there was an Al Qassam bunker in the vicinity. Or, bombing a location with many refugees in tents by stating that some of the resistance commanders were in the area. Given the history of Israeli lies about all the massacres that it has perpetrated, one would think that Amnesty would be more sceptical of Israeli claims, and to challenge them outright. Instead it calls for investigations. Furthermore, when is it justified to kill 100+ civilians in order to kill two fighters? It is curious that a human rights organisation doesn’t reject this outright — there is no need for an investigation. Maybe an analogy could clarify the objection. Imagine that a rapist justified his crime by stating that the victim wore provocative clothing. Amnesty’s actions are akin to investigating if the victim’s clothing was actually sexy.

On 26 August 2024, AI issued a press release on two of the bombings of camps of displaced people killing hundreds.[16] A priori, one would say that it is a welcome report, but one is struck by the fact that these incidents “need to be investigated as war crimes”. Amnesty even reviewed the statements made by the Israeli military to justify the bombing. And to add a comic element, Amnesty sent a note to “Ministry of Justice officials,” i.e., Hamas, to determine if its fighters were sheltering in the bombed locations. In other words, it is asking the Palestinians whether the Israeli bombings were justified! And to top things off, Amnesty regurgitated its accusation that the Palestinian actions, e.g., taking hostages amounted to clear war crimes. On the one hand, AI asks that Israeli actions be investigated, yet for the Palestinians the accusation is clear: these are war crimes.

Amnesty usefully states that using civilians as human shields is “prohibited under international law.” Suggesting that if any fighter mingles with the civilian population, this amounts to a crime. The Palestinian fighters have little choice about where they can operate given that the population is constantly forced to move — the fighters included. But there is a difference between fighters being in close proximity to civilians, and the Israeli practice of placing Palestinian civilians on top of military vehicles or forcing them to enter houses ahead of Israeli soldiers. The difference is the coercion involved, and the fact that the fighters are in the midst of their own people. Thus in the press release, Amnesty wags its finger about fighters finding themselves together with civilians. However, Amnesty has yet to issue one of it missives about the civilians Israeli military forces to act as human shields. We await another press release.

Losing the forest for the trees

The crimes perpetrated against the Palestinians, i.e., genocide, crimes against humanity, and so on, must be described as mass crimes — referent to the population at large. However, Amnesty’s favourite technique to avoid mentioning the mass crimes is to dwell on individual stories to the exclusion of the totality of the crimes. On 19 August 2024, Amnesty issued a press release about the flouting of the Arms Trade Treaty. Thus: “Amnesty International has long been calling for a comprehensive arms embargo on both Israel and Palestinian armed groups because of longstanding patterns of serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law, including war crimes…”. True to form Amnesty bleats about an embargo on “both sides,” as if there were hundreds of military cargo airplanes delivering weapons to the Palestinians. But instead of mentioning the total tonnage of bombs dropped on Gaza, it provides two examples[17]:

Amnesty has documented the use of US-manufactured weapons in a number of unlawful airstrikes, including US-made Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) in two deadly, unlawful air strikes on homes in the occupied Gaza Strip, which killed 43 civilians – 19 children, 14 women and 10 men – on 10 and 22 October 2023.

A GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb, made in the US by Boeing, was used in an Israeli strike in January 2024 which hit a family home in the Tal al-Sultan area of Rafah, killing 18 civilians, including 10 children, four men, and four women.

According to Euromed Human Rights: “Israel dropped 70,000 tons of bombs on Gaza Strip since last October, exceeding World War II bombings in Dresden, Hamburg, London combined.”[18]

 Maybe providing such statistics would be more effective.

Similarly, on 18 July 2024, AI released a rather lengthy report on prison conditions.[19] To its credit, the press release was better than most AI output, but again, after a cursory mention of the total number of cases, it emphasises a few examples of prisoner’s conditions. It is dwelling on a few items to the exclusion of the mass injustice condition.

Long list of neglect

Ever since 7 October 2023, there have been many incidents that didn’t elicit a single comment by Amnesty International. Here are a few items:

• Israel bombed Palestinians waiting to obtain food from a humanitarian aid delivery truck; there were about 210 killed.
• Triple-tap bombings. Israelis bomb an area killing civilians, and then those who come to rescue them, and those who seek to rescue the rescuers.
• Al Jazeera showed a video of airplanes dropping supplies in Gaza. A few minutes later Israelis bombed the locations where the parachutes landed.
• Several hundred medical and emergency rescue staff have been killed; 170+ journalists, and in some cases the journalists’ families were also killed.
• Destruction of universities, schools and hospitals. Israeli soldiers themselves posted videos of rejoicing soldiers when hospitals and universities were blown up.
• There is a serious shortage of potable water for most Gazans. The quality and quantity of water available in Gaza was already a serious issue prior to October 2023. Groundwater had saline seepage, and thus the sodium level was above safe limits. With the destruction of wells, and the inoperability of desalination plants, the access to safe water became a serious challenge. Furthermore, the Israeli military are flooding tunnels with sea water, further contaminating groundwater.
• Israeli military declared a large garbage dump site to be a “safe zone”.
• The Israeli military forced relocations of population from North to South, and later on South to North. And of course more houses were destroyed in the meantime. There are no places where civilians can escape to safety.
• The condition of prisoners held in Israeli jails is appalling: brutality, neglect, meagre access to food and water. Al Jazeera featured the case of Moazez Abayat[20]
  
  
  
   A man who suffered torture, brutal treatment, meagre access to food and water. It was clear that Abayat had lost his mind in prison, and this is certainly not an isolated case. In August, soldiers sodomised prisoners… and +972 magazine published an article about the conditions at a military prison with a jarring statement: “The situation there [Sde Teiman detention center] is more horrific than anything we’ve heard about Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo.”
• The Hannibal killings, i.e., Israeli military killed Israelis to avoid having them taken as hostages. Haaretz reported that more than half the Israeli civilians killed on 7 October were killed by the military.
• Israeli propagandists were ready to make allegations of widespread rape and murder of children. Most of those claims were false.
• The grand larceny and theft of Palestinian land in the West Bank continues, and in the process hundreds have been killed.
• Israeli drones broadcast recordings of children in distress to entice people to investigate, and consequently kill them.
• The day after rulings by international courts (ICJ or ICC), the Israelis engaged in massive bombardments and other destructive actions. It is their means to send a “FU” message. On the eve of Netanyahu’s trip to the US, the Israeli military bombed a refugee camp killing dozens. On the day Netanyahu addressed the US Congress, 100+ Palestinians were killed.The point of this: Israel can do whatever it wants, and it has the US’s backing.
• On the eve of negotiations, Israel perpetrates particularly serious mass crimes. Early in August the US announced “negotiations,” but with meagre Israeli interest. On 10 August, Israel bombed a school killing 100+. Furthermore, Israelis murdered two of the Palestinian negotiators. Who will want to negotiate with Israel now?
• The lack of medicines is causing the certain deaths of those with chronic diseases. The protracted war is a death sentence to diabetics, renal patients, cancer victims….

Impotence and futility

Amnesty issues a few press releases and maybe a report thereafter, but there is no meaningful action. Thus far Amnesty has organised a petition calling for a ceasefire! One can fill the petition form with gibberish, and press the button however many times, and it will register in this preposterous exercise.[21] Liberal souls will be assuaged.

There have been three instances where AI urged its members to write very polite letters to Israeli officials. Thus mass crimes are happening at present, and these “urgent actions” merely plead for the fate of three individuals. All sample letters start with “Dear General…”; that is the way Amnesty likes its members to address the genocidal creeps. These letter writing campaigns are a means to get young idealistic activists to engage in “actions” that are of virtually no consequence.

Every year Amnesty claims to have more members — in the millions. Appealing to this membership base to do something meaningful could possibly be more effective. Palestinian civil society groups have long clamoured for BDS (boycott, divestment, and sanctions). Why can’t AI urge its members to boycott Israeli products? The answer is evident: the mega donors (e.g., Harvey Weinstein, Hollywood’s notorious sex predator and Israel cheerleader; the Sackler Foundation) funding Amnesty’s activities would revolt.[22]

Manifest double standards

Amnesty has produced several press releases advocating intervention in Syria, even using holocaust memes (“never again”) to emphasise its point. It even produced a melodramatic multimedia production on the “horrors” at a notorious prison.[23] When it comes to Israel, Amnesty doesn’t call for intervention; it certainly doesn’t refer to holocaust memes as “never again” seems not to apply to the Palestinians. Amnesty also doesn’t produce melodramatic videos on the most notorious Israeli prisons where inmates are tortured, brutalised and killed.

Regarding the situation in Venezuela, Amnesty demands “urgent actions from ICC prosecutor”[24]

. When it comes to Israel doesn’t call upon the international courts to prosecute Israel for war crimes or worse. According to Donatella Rovera, a senior AI investigator, Amnesty doesn’t issue such calls[25]. Another standard applies.

On 21 May 2024, Amnesty issued a press release urging the ICC to issue arrest warrants against Netanyahu, Gallant and three Palestinian resistance leaders. What Agnes Callamard, AI’s Secretary General, doesn’t explain is the fact that whereas an arrest warrant was issued for Putin, when it comes to Netanyahu, the prosecutor merely petitioned the court to consider issuing a warrant. Given the uproar and threats issued by US politicians, the ICC quietly dropped the matter — thus there are no warrants issued against Netanyahu and Gallant at present. There is scant evidence of a moral backbone at the ICC. But the ICC statements allows Amnesty to posture by wagging its finger at “both sides”.

On 2 September 2024, Amnesty issued a demand for Mongolia to arrest President Putin, and did so in a rather hectoring tone.[26] And although the ICC no longer seeks to prosecute Netanyahu, this doesn’t stop other organisations to call on governments hosting Netanyahu for his arrest. Alas, Amnesty didn’t send a similar demand to the US. Maybe such a call would have tarnished Netanyahu’s reputation during his recent address to the US Congress.

On the eve of the Gulf War against Iraq, Amnesty produced a report on the purported case of Iraqi soldiers “throwing babies out of incubators”. President Bush appeared on TV showing this report and using it as a justification for war. After the hoax was exposed Amnesty didn’t issue any apology or explanation. But now we face a real situation in Gaza where the Israeli military ordered the evacuation of Gaza’s largest hospital and consequently dozens of newborns had to be taken off incubators or other equipment. The doctor attending the children noted that most of them would die. One would say that this would provide emotive material to campaign to obtain a ceasefire; the plight of babies might resonate with Western liberal souls. Alas, Amnesty was silent in this instance.

And there are blind spots

One must marvel at the long list of press releases and reports Amnesty produces on a regular basis. No corner of the planet is exempt of an Amnesty commentary or reprimand. From commenting on transexual rights in Mongolia, sex workers rights, climate change, migrant rights and discrimination, etc. And many of its missives wag a finger at the offending state with titles including “… must do this”. Amnesty frequently waves its human rights magic wand. Somehow they think they have the standing of a UN-like organisation to pontificate on any topic anywhere in the world.

But one encounters blind spots in AI’s coverage. There are very few admonishing press releases regarding US, UK, or Israeli atrocious behaviour. When offending actions are mentioned at all, one finds them couched with terms such as “alleged”; and certainly not calling for a tribunal to hold criminals to account. The war in Ukraine has elicited minor critical commentary except chastising Russia; the US role in causing and fuelling the war are not mentioned. In general, AI’s position on issues aligns with US, UK and Israeli state policy. There is no criticism or even mention of the US’s penchant for forever wars; for waging violent actions in many places in the world. These seem to be just fine by Amnesty’s standards.

The United Nations Security Council has become a joke — where one finds the US and its acolytes brazenly lying, and exhibiting monumental hypocrisy and cynicism. Any relevant resolution delivering a modicum of justice is routinely vetoed. This is plainly evident regarding calls for a ceasefire in Gaza with such resolutions vetoed. On 21 December 2023, the US put forth a “compromise” resolution regarding a ceasefire and humanitarian aid. The curious thing is that on the same day the diplomats acknowledged that Israel would not be bound by the resolution — it was merely an exercise of hypocrisy on steroids. Yet the next day, Agnes Callamard, AI’s Secretary General, stated that: “This is a much-needed resolution…”![27]

. To her credit, she also stated: “It is disgraceful that the US was able to stall and use the threat of its veto power to force the UN Security Council to weaken a much-needed call for an immediate end to attacks by all parties.”

There is no pushback

An important role any organisation could play would be to confront local supporters of regimes involved in mass crimes. There are notorious cases:

• Nikki Haley, the failed presidential candidate, went to Israel to express her support to the extent that she wrote “kill them all” on an Israel artillery shell.
• At the August 2024 Democratic National Convention attendees were active cheerleaders for the Israeli actions.
• The US Congress welcomed Netanyahu and gave him 57 standing ovations.

Maybe these outrageous statements and actions would elicit critical commentary. It is not only a generic trite statement about what is happening “over there,” but what is also necessary is to challenge the local enablers of mass crimes. Alas, Amnesty would rather consort with US politicians rather than to confront them.

The bane of HR NGOs

In Europe, various governments and NGOs provide scholarships for students to specialise in Human Rights. The courses are offered in several countries, and hundreds of students attend Human Rights centres each year. Italians get to study in Finland for a year…. And we find the grotesque situation of Dutch students studying human rights in Israel; it is a bit like going for education on animal rights to a slaughterhouse. This is all courtesy of EU largesse. The graduates then work for hundreds of NGOs or government agencies. Each of them will then wave their human rights wand over a topic that may be fashionable, invariably gay/trans rights, women’s reproductive rights, sex worker’s rights, etc. Further fuelling the human rights industry is the lavish funding obtained from various lottery funds — much of the profits from such institutions are disbursed to NGOs. The human rights industry experiences subsidised growth. Thus each NGO with its own warped agenda receives funds directly or indirectly. The directors of some NGOs command six figure salaries — a favourite for out-of-office politicians seeking a sinecure.[28]

In the Netherlands where this process has been in place for decades, the human rights lobby has mushroomed in size and now manifests a dysfunctional dynamic, i.e., the NGOs bring incessant lawsuits against the government tying it down in court.

Do NGOs advocating Palestinian human rights get to play in this merry go round? Fat chance!

Human rights are for the birds

When confronted with mass crimes what is needed is justice, and not one of its bastardised, neutered, malleable and ineffective substitutes. If one wants justice then it behooves one to speak in terms of justice, and to avoid the human rights mumbo jumbo. This is specially the case when human rights have been cynically exploited and weaponised by the US and UK[29]. A framework that can be used to justify wars, the so-called humanitarian interventions, cannot be a framework that advances justice or motivates people to act against mass crimes. The criminals react accordingly, i.e., they aren’t bothered if they are called transgressors of human rights, but may fear being accused of mass crimes.

The mask comes off

The current wars in Gaza, Ukraine, etc., and the reactions surrounding them has torn off the mask of the American empire revealing its hypocrisy, cynicism and sadism. Many of the “values” so dear to the neoliberals have been shown to be a sham. “Democracy,” “International law,” “freedom of speech,”…., and of course “human rights” have fallen off their pedestals. The collateral damage of the collapse also tears into the United Nations, the ICC, ICJ, and also the human rights industry because they also have been shown to be so ineffective and compromised. Amnesty International is demonstrably a conflicted organisation steeped in hypocrisy. It is a tool used by the UK and US governments to weaponise “human rights” to suit its own ends: the justification of wars, and the demonisation of “regimes,” i.e., the governments that the empire doesn’t like. It has been a conduit for pro-war propaganda in the past, and even calling for so-called humanitarian military interventions.

What is needed are critical voices that highlight the daily massacres, that call for the criminals and their enablers to be held to account, and to sue for a modicum of justice. Calling for a ceasefire is the bare minimum. Alas, most human rights NGOs don’t even fulfil this task. When Amnesty International postures about all sorts of trendy human rights everywhere in the world, but then doesn’t cover genocide and spring into effective action, then let it shut up entirely.

One thing is certain: Amnesty International is not part of the solution, it is part of the problem.

Notes

[1] This is an analysis of Amnesty’s press releases and reports. These can be found here:

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/ Amnesty’s position are also available on Twitter, but these are not covered here. The press releases and reports by other HR organisations are very similar and exhibit the same bias.

[2] Uri Blau, Documents reveal how Israel made Amnesty’s local branch a front for the Foreign Ministry in the 70s;

The Israeli government funded the establishment and activity of the Amnesty International branch in Israel in the 1960s and 70s. Official documents reveal that the chairman of the organization was in constant contact with the Foreign Ministry and received instructions from it; Haaretz, 18 March 2017.

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2017/3/22/israels-human-rights-spies-manipulating-the-discourse

Neve Gordon and Nicola Perugini, “Israel’s human rights spies”: Manipulating the discourse

Revelations about Israel’s infiltration of NGOs in the 1970s shocked many, but human rights ‘spies’ are still out there, 22 Mar 2017.

[3] Craig Mokhiber (Director of the New York Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights), The resignation letter.

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2023/11/a-textbook-case-of-genocide/

[4] Avi Scharf, Weapons shipments to Israel: A Dizzying Pace, Then a Drop: How U.S. Arms Shipments to Israel Slowed Down

subtitle: Publicly available flight tracking data shows how many U.S. arms shipments have arrived in Israel each month since the Gaza war started, revealing a sharp rise and then gradual tapering off in the pace of deliveries, Haaretz, 27 June 2024.

[5] Israel wants to be feared to maintain its morally bankrupt deterrence policy. Thus any resistance must be smashed with disproportionate power. The Dahiya neighbourhood in Beirut was brutally bombed, and the politicians ordering the bombing were very pleased with the level of destruction. Thus the Dahiya doctrine.

[6] Alastair Crooke, Trickery, Humiliation, Death – and the Timeless Hunger for ‘Honour and Glory’, Strategic Culture, 30 December 2023.

[7] Ilan Pappe, the great Israeli historian, once replied to a question of whether Israel was an apartheid state by stating: “if it quacks like a duck, and waddles like a duck, then it is apartheid”.

[8] Some examples of AI Press releases about OPT that don’t mention Gaza at all.

AI, Dutch Investor pushes for human rights safeguards to stop use of surveillance technology against Palestinians, 4 July 2024. Refers to the intrusive video spying.

AI, Israel’s attempt to sway WhatsApp case casts doubt on its ability to deal with NSO spyware cases, 25 July 2024.

[9] Operation “Cast Lead” is a curious name for a military operation. It actually refers to a passage in Deuteronomy where the Hebrews exterminate their opponents to the extent that they pour molten lead down their throats.

[10] Contrast AI’s ahistorical reporting on the situation in Gaza with that of Syria. When it comes to Syria, the history of the “regime” is suddenly an issue.

[11] Rasha Khatib, Martin McKee and Salim Yusuf, “Counting the dead in Gaza: difficult but essential”, The Lancet, Volume 404, Issue 10449, pp237-238, 20 July 2024.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(24)01169-3/fulltext

[12] AI, Israel/ OPT: Hamas and other armed groups must immediately release civilians held hostage in Gaza,12 July 2024

[13] By Yaniv Kubovich • Haaretz 7 July 2024

IDF Ordered Hannibal Directive on October 7 to Prevent Hamas Taking

Soldiers Captive

Subtitle: “there was crazy hysteria, and decisions started being made without verified

information: Documents and testimonies obtained by Haaretz reveal the Hannibal operational order, which directs the use of force to prevent soldiers being taken into captivity, was employed at three army facilities infiltrated by Hamas, potentially endangering civilians as well”

[14] Crisis in Gaza: Scenario-based Health Impact Projections

https://gaza-projections.org/gaza_projections_report.pdf

[15] AI, Gaza: Discovery of mass graves highlights urgent need to grant access to independent human rights investigators, 24 April 2024.

[16] AI, Israel/OPT: Israeli attacks targeting Hamas and other armed group fighters that killed scores of displaced civilians in Rafah should be investigated as war crimes, 26 August 2024.

[17] AI, Global: Governments’ brazen flouting of Arms Trade Treaty rules leading to devastating loss of life, 19 August 2024.

[18] https://www.sgr.org.uk/resources/gaza-one-most-intense-bombardments-history

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/amount-of-israeli-bombs-dropped-on-gaza-surpasses-that-of-world-war-ii/3239665

[19] AI, “Israel must end mass incommunicado detention and torture of Palestinians from Gaza”, 18 July 2024.

[20] https://www.aljazeera.com/program/newsfeed/2024/7/10/freed-former-palestinian-bodybuilder-alleges-abuse-by-israeli-jailers

and

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/palestine-west-bank-muazzaz-abayat-prison-interview

[21] https://www.amnesty.org/en/petition/demand-a-ceasefire-by-all-parties-to-end-civilian-suffering/

[22] Thomas Frank, Hypocrite at the good cause parties, Le Monde Diplomatique, February 2018. Frank reports that Harvey Weinstein made “AI-USA possible”.

[23] Paul de Rooij, Amnesty International trumpets for another “Humanitarian” war… this time in Syria, MintPress, 23 March 2018.

[24] Amnesty, Venezuela: Scale and gravity of ongoing crimes demand urgent actions from ICC prosecutor, 9 August 2024

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/08/venezuela-crimes-demand-urgent-action-icc-prosecutor/

[25] Personal communication with Donatella Rovera, January 2003.

[26] AI, “Mongolia: Putin must be arrested and surrendered to the International Criminal Court”, 2 September 2024.

[27] https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/12/israel-opt-adoption-of-un-resolution-to-expedite-humanitarian-aid-to-gaza-an-important-but-insufficient-step/

Israel/OPT: Adoption of UN resolution to expedite humanitarian aid to Gaza an important but insufficient step, 22 Decemeber 2024.

[28] . Irene Khan, the former Amnesty general secretary, received a £533,000 “golden handshake” when she departed.

[29] For some of the background history of Amnesty International, see: Kirsten Sellars, The Rise and Rise of Human Rights, Sutton Publications, 2002. Also, Alfred de Zayas, The Human Rights Industry, Clarity Press, 2023.

Source: The Unz Review