Now
Available from
CounterPunch for Only $11.50 (S/H Included)
Today's
Stories
November 26, 2003
Paul de Rooij
Amnesty
International: the Case of a Rape Foretold
November 25, 2003
Linda S. Heard
We,
the Besieged: Western Powers Redefine Democracy
Diane Christian
Hocus
Pocus in the White House: Of Warriors and Liberators
Mark Engler
Miami's
Trade Troubles
David Lindorff
Ashcroft's
Cointelpro
Website of the Day
Young McCarthyites of Texas
November 24, 2003
Jeremy Scahill
The
Miami Model
Elaine Cassel
Gulag
Americana: You Can't Come Home Again
Ron Jacobs
Iraq
Now: Oh Good, Then the War's Over?
Alexander Cockburn
Rupert Murdoch: Global Tyrant
November 14 / 23, 2003
Alexander Cockburn
Clintontime:
Was It Really a Golden Age?
Saul Landau
Words
of War
Noam Chomsky
Invasion
as Marketing Problem: Iraq War and Contempt for Democracy
Stan Goff
An Open Letter to GIs in Iraq: Hold on to Your Humanity
Jeffrey St. Clair
Bush Puts Out a Contract on the Spotted Owl
John Holt
Blue Light: Battle for the Sweetgrass Hills
Adam Engel
A DC Lefty in King George's Court: an Interview with Sam Smith
Joanne Mariner
In a Dark Hole: Moussaoui and the Hidden Detainees
Uri Avnery
The General as Pseudo-Dove: Ya'alon's 70 Virgins
M. Shahid Alam
Voiding the Palestinians: an Allegory
Juliana Fredman
Visions of Concrete
Norman Solomon
Media Clash in Brazil
Brian Cloughley
Is Anyone in the Bush Administration Telling the Truth?
William S. Lind
Post-Machine Gun Tactics
Patrick W. Gavin
Imagine
Dave Lindorff
Bush's
Brand of Leadership: Putting Himself First
Tom Crumpacker
Pandering to Anti-Castro Hardliners
Erik Fleming
Howard Dean's Folly
Rick Giombetti
Challenging the Witch Doctors of the New Imperialism: a Review
of Bush in Babylon
Jorge Mariscal
Las Adelitas, 2003: Mexican-American Women in Iraq
Chris Floyd
Logical Conclusions
Mickey Z.
Does William Safire Need Mental Help?
David Vest
Owed to the Confederate Dead
Ron Jacobs
Joe: the Sixties Most Unforgiving Film
Dave Zirin
Foreman and Carlos: a Tale of Two Survivors
Poets' Basement
Guthrie, Albert, Greeder, Ghalib and Alam
November 13, 2003
Jack McCarthy
Veterans
for Peace Booted from Vet Day Parade
Adam Keller
Report
on the Ben Artzi Verdict
Richard Forno
"Threat Matrix:" Homeland Security Goes Prime-Time
Vijay Prashad
Confronting
the Evangelical Imperialists
November 12, 2003
Elaine Cassel
The
Supremes and Guantanamo: a Glimmer of Hope?
Col. Dan Smith
Unsolicited
Advice: a Reply to Rumsfeld's Memo
Jonathan Cook
Facility
1391: Israel's Guantanamo
Robert Fisk
Osama Phones Home
Michael Schwartz
The Wal-Mart Distraction and the California Grocery Workers Strike
John Chuckman
Forty
Years of Lies
Doug Giebel
Jessica Lynch and Saving American Decency
Uri Avnery
Wanted: a Sharon of the Left
Website of the Day
Musicians Against Sweatshops
November 11, 2003
David Lindorff
Bush's
War on Veterans
Stan Goff
Honoring
Real Vets; Remembering Real War
Earnest McBride
"His
Feet Were on the Ground": Was Steve McNair's Cousin Lynched?
Derek Seidman
Imperialism
Begins at Home: an Interview with Stan Goff
David Krieger
Mr. President, You Can Run But You Can't Hide
Sen. Ernest Hollings
My Cambodian Moment on the Iraq War
Dan Bacher
The Invisible Man Resigns
Kam Zarrabi
Hypocrisy at the Top
John Eskow
Born on Veteran's Day
Website of the Day
Left Hook
November 10, 2003
Robert Fisk
Looney
Toons in Rummyworld: How We Denied Democracy to the Middle East
Elaine Cassel
Papa's Gotta Brand New Bag (of Tricks): Patriot Act Spawns Similar
Laws Across Globe
James Brooks
Israel's New War Machine Opens the Abyss
Thom Rutledge
The Lost Gospel of Rummy
Stew Albert
Call Him Al
Gary Leupp
"They
Were All Non-Starters": On the Thwarted Peace Proposals
November 8/9, 2003
Kathleen and Bill Christison
Zionism
as Racist Ideology
Gabriel Kolko
Intelligence
for What?
The Vietnam War Reconsidered
Saul Landau
The
Bride Wore Black: the Policy Nuptials of Boykin and Wolfowitz
Brian Cloughley
Speeding Up to Nowhere: Training the New Iraqi Police
William Blum
The Anti-Empire Report:
A Permanent Occupation?
David Lindorff
A New Kind of Dancing in Iraq: from Occupation to Guerrilla War
Elaine Cassel
Bush's War on Non-Citizens
Tim Wise
Persecuting the Truth: Claims of Christian Victimization Ring
Hollow
Toni Solo
Robert Zoellick and "Wise Blood"
Michael Donnelly
Will the Real Ron Wyden Please Stand Up?
Mark Hand
Building a Vanguard Movement: a Review of Stan Goff's Full Spectrum
Disorder
Norman Solomon
War, Social Justice, Media and Democracy
Norman Madarasz
American Neocons and the Jerusalem Post
Adam Engel
Raising JonBenet
Dave Zirin
An Interview with George Foreman
Poets' Basement
Guthrie, Albert and Greeder
November 7, 2003
Nelson Valdes
Latin
America in Crisis and Cuba's Self-Reliance
David Vest
Surely
It Can't Get Any Worse?
Chris Floyd
An Inspector
Calls: The Kay Report as War Crime Indictment
William S. Lind
Indicators:
Where This War is Headed
Elaine Cassel
FBI to Cryptome: "We Are Watching You"
Maria Tomchick
When Public Transit Gets Privatized
Uri Avnery
Israeli
Roulette
November 6, 2003
Ron Jacobs
With
a Peace Like This...
Conn Hallinan
Rumsfeld's
New Model Army
Maher Arar
This
is What They Did to Me
Elaine Cassel
A Bad
Day for Civil Liberties: the Case of Maher Arar
Neve Gordon
Captives
Behind Sharon's Wall
Ralph Nader and Lee Drutman
An Open Letter to John Ashcroft on Corporate Crime
November 5, 2003
Jeffrey St. Clair
Just
a Match Away:
Fire Sale in So Cal
Dave Lindorff
A Draft in the Forecast?
Robert Jensen
How I Ended Up on the Professor Watch List
Joanne Mariner
Prisons as Mental Institutions
Patrick Cockburn
Saddam Not Organizing Iraqi Resistance
Simon Helweg-Larsen
Centaurs
from Dusk to Dawn: Remilitarization and the Guatemalan Elections
Josh Frank
Silencing "the Reagans"
Website of the Day
Everything You Wanted to Know About Howard Dean But Were Afraid
to Ask
November 4, 2003
Robert Fisk
Smearing
Said and Ashrawi: When Did "Arab" Become a Dirty Word?
Ray McGovern
Chinook Down: It's Beginning to Look a Lot Like Vietnam
Woodruff / Wypijewski
Debating
the New Unity Partnership
Karyn Strickler
When
Opponents of Abortion Dream
Norman Solomon
The
Steady Theft of Our Time
Tariq Ali
Resistance
and Independence in Iraq
November 3, 2003
Patrick Cockburn
The
Bloodiest Day Yet for Americans in Iraq: Report from Fallujah
Dave Lindorff
Philly's
Buggy Election
Janine Pommy Vega
Sarajevo Hands 2003
Bernie Dwyer
An
Interview with Chomsky on Cuba
November 1 / 2,
2003
Saul Landau
Cui
Bono? The Cuba Embargo as Rip Off
Noam Chomsky
Empire of the Men of Best Quality
Bruce Jackson
Midge Decter and the Taxi Driver
Brian Cloughley
"Mow the Whole Place Down"
John Stanton
The Pentagon's Love Affair with Land Mines
William S. Lind
Bush's Bizarre Korean Gambit
Ben Tripp
The Brown Paste on Bush's Shoes
Christopher Brauchli
Divine Hatred
Dave Zirin
An Interview with John Carlos
Agustin Velloso
Oil in Equatorial Guinea: Where Trickle Down Doesn't Trickle
Josh Frank
Howard Dean and Affirmative Action
Ron Jacobs
Standing Up to El Diablo: the 1981 Blockade of Diablo Canyon
Strickler / Hermach
Liar, Liar Forests on Fire
David Vest
Jimmy T99 Nelson, a Blues Legend and the Songs that Made Him
Famous
Adam Engel
America, What It Is
Dr. Susan Block
Christy Canyon, a Life in Porn
Poets' Basement
Greeder, Albert & Guthrie
Congratulations
to CounterPuncher David Vest: Winner of 2 Muddy Awards for Best
Blues Pianist in the Pacific Northwest!
October 31, 2003
Lee Ballinger
Making
a Dollar Out of 15 Cents: The Sweatshops of Sean "P. Diddy"
Combs
Wayne Madsen
The
GOP's Racist Trifecta
Michael Donnelly
Settling for Peanuts: Democrats Trick the Greens, Treat Big Timber
Patrick Cockburn
Baghdad
Diary: Iraqis are Naming Their New Babies "Saddam"
Elaine Cassel
Coming
to a State Near You: The Matrix (Interstate Snoops, Not the Movie)
Linda Heard
An Arab View of Masonry
October 30, 2003
Forrest Hylton
Popular
Insurrection and National Revolution in Bolivia
Eric Ruder
"We Have to Speak Out!": Marching with the Military
Families
Dave Lindorff
Big
Lies and Little Lies: The Meaning of "Mission Accomplished"
Philip Adams
"Everyone is Running Scared": Denigrating Critics of
Israel
Sean Donahue
Howard Dean: a Hawk in a Dove's Cloak
Robert Jensen
Big Houses & Global Justice: A Moral Level of Consumption?
Alexander Cockburn
Paul
Krugman: Part of the Problem
October 29, 2003
Chris Floyd
Thieves
Like Us: Cheney's Backdoor to Halliburton
Robert Fisk
Iraq Guerrillas Adopt a New Strategy: Copy the Americans
Rick Giombetti
Let
Them Eat Prozac: an Interview with David Healy
The Intelligence Squad
Dark
Forces? The Military Steps Up Recruiting of Blacks
Elaine Cassel
Prosecutors
as Therapists, Phantoms as Terrorists
Marie Trigona
Argentina's War on the Unemployed Workers Movement
Gary Leupp
Every
Day, One KIA: On the Iraq War Casualty Figures
October 28, 2003
Rich Gibson
The
Politics of an Inferno: Notes on Hellfire 2003
Uri Avnery
Incident
in Gaza
Diane Christian
Wishing
Death
Robert Fisk
Eyewitness
in Iraq: "They're Getting Better"
Toni Solo
Authentic Americans and John Negroponte
Jason Leopold
Halliburton in Iran
Shrireen Parsons
When T-shirts are Verboten
Chris White
9/11
in Context: a Marine Veteran's Perspective
October 27,
2003
William A. Cook
Ministers
of War: Criminals of the Cloth
David Lindorff
The
Times, Dupes and the Pulitzer
Elaine Cassel
Antonin
Scalia's Contemptus Mundi
Robert Fisk
Occupational Schizophrenia
John Chuckman
Banging Your Head into Walls
Seth Sandronsky
Snoops R Us
Bill Kauffman
George
Bush, the Anti-Family President
October 25 / 26,
2003
Robert Pollin
The
US Economy: Another Path is Possible
Jeffrey St. Clair
Outsourcing US Guided Missile Technology to China
James Bunn
Plotting
Pre-emptive Strikes
Saul Landau
Should Limbaugh Do Time?
Ted Honderich
Palestinian Terrorism, Morality & Germany
Thomas Nagy
Saving the Army of Peace
Christopher Brauchli
Between Bush and a Lobotomy: Killing Endangered Species for Profit
Laura Carlsen
Latin America's Archives of Terror
Diane Christian
Evil Acts & Evil Actors
Muqtedar Khan
Lessons from the Imperial Adventure in Iraq
John Feffer
The Tug of War on the Korea Peninsula
Brian Cloughley
Iraq War Memories are Made of Lies
Benjamin Dangl
and Kathryn Ledebur
An Uneasy Peace in Bolivia
Karyn Strickler
Down
with Big Brother's Spying Eyes
Noah Leavitt
Legal Globalization
John Stanton
Hitler's Ghost Haunts America
Mickey Z.
War of the Words
Adam Engel
Tractatus Ridiculous
Poets' Basement
Curtis, Subiet and Albert
Website of the Weekend
Project Last Stand
October 24, 2003
Kurt Nimmo
Ashcroft's
War on Greenpeace
Lenni Brenner
The Demographics of American Jews
Jeffrey St. Clair
Rockets,
Napalm, Torpedoes and Lies: the Attack on the USS Liberty Revisited
Sarah Weir
Cover-up of the Israeli Attack on the US Liberty
David Krieger
WMD Found in DC: Bush is the Button
Mohammed Hakki
It's Palestine, Stupid!: Americans and the Middle East
Harry Browne
Northern
Ireland: the Agreement that Wasn't
Hot Stories
Alexander Cockburn
Behold,
the Head of a Neo-Con!
Subcomandante Marcos
The
Death Train of the WTO
Norman Finkelstein
Hitchens
as Model Apostate
Steve Niva
Israel's
Assassination Policy: the Trigger for Suicide Bombings?
Dardagan,
Slobodo and Williams
CounterPunch Exclusive:
20,000 Wounded Iraqi Civilians
Steve
J.B.
Prison Bitch
Sheldon
Rampton and John Stauber
True Lies: the Use of Propaganda
in the Iraq War
Wendell
Berry
Small Destructions Add Up
CounterPunch
Wire
WMD: Who Said What When
Cindy
Corrie
A Mother's Day Talk: the Daughter
I Can't Hear From
Gore Vidal
The
Erosion of the American Dream
Francis Boyle
Impeach
Bush: A Draft Resolution
Click Here
for More Stories.
|
November
26, 2003
Amnesty
International
The
Case of a Rape Foretold
By
PAUL de ROOIJ
Amnesty International is primarily motivated
not by human rights but by publicity. Second comes money. Third
comes getting more members. Fourth, internal turf battles. And
then finally, human rights, genuine human rights concerns.
-- Francis Boyle, Prof. of International
Law and former board member of Amnesty International [1].
Human Rights organizations used to play an important
role raising awareness of human rights abuses, scoring an occasional
point with one state or another, and were instrumental in releasing
a handful of hapless prisoners. However, they have increasingly
abdicated their role as modern-day paladins of justice, to become
politically manipulated organizations that are more concerned
with fundraising or appearing on TV. Several authors have described
how human rights organizations have played a role in priming
the propaganda pump prior to war; these accounts make sobering
reading, and they dispel preconceptions about some of these organizations
[2].
A recent UN report confirmed that the
situation for the Palestinians is desperate and has reached crisis
proportions [3]. The report goes so far as to state: "a
UN committee monitoring human rights abuses of Palestinians [for
the last 35 years] has concluded that the situation in the Israeli-occupied
territories of Gaza and the West Bank was the worst ever last
year." This situation is chronic, and indeed, mass abuses
of human rights have been going on for decades. Anyone concerned
with justice for the Palestinian people must wonder what position
human rights organizations have taken on the issue and what they
have reported. In the case of Amnesty International, it is a
sorry and dubious record. This article presents an in-depth look
at AI's poor record in monitoring the plight of the Palestinians
during the second intifada.
This article is a follow-up to: "AI: Say It Isn't
So" (CounterPunch, Oct.
31, 2002).
1. Insult to injury
The first sentence in AI's Oct. 13th
press release appeared promising: "[AI] condemns in the
strongest terms the large-scale destruction by the Israeli army
of Palestinian homes in a refugee camp in the southern Gaza Strip
town of Rafah, which made homeless hundreds of people" [4].
It then mentions war crimes but, more specifically, says that
Israeli actions "constitute war crimes." This is better
than its previous ambivalent accusations [5]. Some of AI's previous
reports yielded only generic references to war crimes, leaving
it unclear whether the perpetrators were Israelis or Palestinians;
by any measure such references to war crimes were less than useful
[6]. Furthermore, in its latest press release AI used the phrase
"strongly condemned" when referring to Israeli actions
-- this reproach had been thus far usually reserved for Palestinian
violence. So far, so good.
However, the remainder of the press release
raises many questions. Here is the final sentence: "[AI]
condemns the deliberate killings of Israeli civilians by Palestinian
armed groups as a crime against humanity." The reaction
of Francis Boyle, a professor of Law, puts this into perspective:
"What a joke and a fraud. So those living under the boot
of Israel's genocidal regime are the bigger criminals under international
law. Every expert knows that crimes against humanity are far
more serious than war crimes, and the precursor to genocide."
Furthermore, it is very odd that AI deemed fit to add this last
sentence to a press release dealing with crimes against Palestinians.
And finally, while during the second intifada the Palestinians
have been smeared with "crimes against humanity" several
times now, AI has not leveled a clear accusation of this crime
against Israel -- although it would be rather apropos [7]. AI
has stated that some Israeli actions "may also constitute
crimes against humanity," but this is somewhat ambivalent
compared to the accusation leveled against Palestinians.
Perhaps an analogy will clarify the objection.
If a man rapes a woman at knifepoint, it would be odd to suggest
that the woman should be imprisoned for resisting the rapist.
However, at present, Amnesty's stance favors "punishing
the rape victim."
2. Circumscribing
the crimes
A careful reading of any AI statement
referring to possible Israeli war crimes reveals another curious
bias: the severity of the crimes referred to is restricted and
only a fraction of Israeli actions are mentioned. For example,
the reference to war crimes in its October 13th press release
only pertains to the demolition of houses and property [8]. Thus,
the broad array of systematic violations of Palestinian human
rights is not part of the war crimes allegation.
A September 3, 2002 press release stated:
"unlawful forcible transfer of protected persons constitutes
a war crime [9]." The fact that the homes of the families
of the people involved already had been demolished in an act
of collective punishment without appeal was not part of AI's
condemnation. Although AI highlights one breach of humanitarian
law and names it a war crime, it is curious that it doesn't encompass
a broad array of serious Israeli actions. The circumscription
of these crimes lessens the gravity of the accusation.
To continue with our rape analogy: if
a man were to rape a woman at knifepoint, it would certainly
be odd to condemn the rapist only for not wearing a condom. AI's
accusations of war crimes are the equivalent of "the rapist
was not wearing a condom."
3. Willful neglect
A recurrent problem with AI's stance
on Palestinian human rights is the simple lack of adequate reporting
-- the long list of massive abuses of Palestinian human rights
is mostly neglected. On September 8, 2003, AI released a report
on the effects of closures on the Occupied Territories [10].
This report was issued 308 days after its previous report, and
in the meantime, 594 Palestinians had been killed [11]. The Israeli
policy of closures was already apparent years ago and, to be
generous, one can only say that this report was late. Furthermore,
this report dealt with an issue that isn't the most serious threat
to Palestinian human rights today. That is, while the closure
policy is indeed a deliberate ploy to make the lives of Palestinians
miserable, it has been superseded by far more injurious Israeli
policies. Most important at present is the construction of the
land-grab wall that penetrates deep into the West Bank. This
is causing far more misery and hardship than the closures --
indeed, the tens of thousands of Palestinians isolated in the
enclaves west of the wall are subjected to a form of closure,
which is intensified by the knowledge that it is intended to
force them to abandon their homes, land and livelihoods. Further,
the occupation policies are causing severe malnutrition in a
significant portion of the population. Then there are the tens
of thousands of maimed Palestinians. AI neglects many topics
[12].
Once again, if a man were raping a woman,
it would be unconscionable to delay and, when finally intervening,
simply to admonish the rapist that he is making the victim "uncomfortable."
And yet, in the current context, AI waits a long time between
reports, and then mentions only a fraction of the abuses taking
place -- and not necessarily the most egregious ones; it is just
mentioning the "discomfort of the rape victim".
4. The trees for the
forest
Any long-term observer of the situation
in Occupied Palestine will know that there is a pattern of ethnic
cleansing, and that these policies are systematic. Once the scale,
intent, and systematic nature are acknowledged, then the next
step is to consider naming these "crimes against humanity"
-- one of the most serious crimes.
Here, again, one can see AI's bias at
work, in its apparent refusal to recognize that there is a pattern
and a history of abuse. It is evident from AI's public record
that it discusses individual events, or individual practices,
but it is unwilling to declare that they are intentional or systematic
in nature. It has a propensity to produce tedious lists of events,
but then neglect important context. There is a history of ethnic
cleansing, the current Israeli government is led by a war criminal,
and current Israeli actions are consistent with some of the more
truculent statements made by its leadership or their minions.
Viewed in this context, Israeli actions must be deemed intentional
and systematic, and this can only mean that serious crimes have
been perpetrated -- but this is something that AI is not willing
to acknowledge.
Again, the rape analogy elucidates the
objection. In the case of a serial rapist assaulting a woman,
it would be rather odd if the history of the rapist were ignored.
In the current context, AI's statement equates to: "hey
you, knock it off."
5. Calling for a war
crimes tribunal
Anyone who has traveled to the Occupied
Territories will have been confronted with some difficult questions
posed by Palestinians. In particular, questions about international
protection are difficult to answer. One recurrent question is
why hasn't the Israeli leadership been indicted for serious crimes.
Sharon, Mofaz, Eliezer, Peres, Netanyahu, Barak, and Ya'alon,
are some strong contenders to appear in front of a war crimes
tribunal. Why this hasn't happened yet is a good question.
Thus far, AI has refused to issue a call
for the institution of a war crimes tribunal for Israel-Palestine.
When questioned about this an AI researcher stated: " but
then we would have to do that for everyone." This answer
is curious from an organization that provided counsel at a lawsuit
brought against Sharon in Brussels [13]. If Sharon deserves to
be indicted for the crimes committed at Sabra and Shatila (in
Lebanon), then why not name the people who should be indicted
for the crimes committed in Palestine?
AI's current stance also assumes that
the Israel-Palestine conflict is much like other conflicts. However,
one should note that Palestinians have been at the receiving
end of occupation, dispossession, ethnic cleansing and mass abuses
of human rights for decades now. To put it into perspective,
consider that Ronnie Kasrils, Minister of Water in South Africa,
and a longtime anti-apartheid activist, stated that the conflict
in Apartheid South Africa pales by comparison to the Palestinian
conflict [14]. During the worst years of the repression in apartheid-South
Africa, airplanes or helicopter gunships did not bomb the townships.
However, in the Occupied Territories this is all too common.
The repression of the Palestinians is worse than that suffered
by the black population under apartheid. Thus, Palestine is a
case deserving special attention and action. One of the few threats
that can have an effect against Israelis is the call for the
institution of a war crimes tribunal to prosecute Sharon and
his gang.
Until now this is as far as AI is willing
to go:
Amnesty International calls on the international
community:
--To bring to justice anyone suspected
of war crimes or crimes against humanity who may be within their
jurisdiction [15]
Notice the "courage" exhibited
here. AI doesn't name who or which of the parties to the conflict
should be brought to justice. It is a generic request -- although,
as we saw at the start of this article, AI has accused the Palestinians,
but not Israel, of "crimes against humanity."
Again, consider the rape analogy. AI's
stance equates to posting intentionally blurred "wanted"
posters of both the rapist and the rape victim. Of course, there
will be no name on the rapist's poster.
6. Geneva Convention
-- abrogated
de facto.
The basic humanitarian law pertaining
to Israeli obligations vis-à-vis the Palestinians is the
Fourth Geneva Convention. However, the Israelis have long disingenuously
argued that this doesn't apply to them [16]. Furthermore, the
actions of both the US and Israel indicate that the Geneva Convention
has been abrogated de facto. If so, all AI's trite recitations
of the numerous breaches of this particular Convention are pointless.
AI must decide if it wants to go down the legalistic path or
to remain a human rights advocate. It is obvious from its actions
that it has chosen the former role, and it is using a legal framework
that will not be implemented.
7. There is a pattern
and a history
AI's dubious role in relation to Israel-Palestine
is not new. During the 1980s AI didn't list any Palestinian prisoners
of conscience [17]; and similarly, it never referred to incidents
of torture [18]. Things changed slightly during the first intifada;
AI had no choice but to improve its coverage of Palestinian human
rights -- the violations were too obvious. By the early 1990s
some references were made to torture and a few prisoners of conscience
were listed. So it is of interest to determine AI's current stance
on the following key contentious issues: torture, prisoners of
conscience, massacre and ethnic cleansing. If these aren't given
sufficient mention, or even not mentioned at all, then a few
questions arise.
7a. Prisoners of conscience
(POC)
At present, AI only recognizes two Palestinian
prisoners of conscience and two "possible" POC [19].
It seems that it is more difficult for AI to bestow POC status
on a Palestinian prisoner than for the Pope to canonize a saint.
Furthermore, no lists are available of the current Palestinian
POCs or what has happened to the ones who were previously imprisoned.
AI admits that it "doesn't make such lists public."
In other words, it is barely doing anything for the thousands
of Palestinian prisoners, and therefore it is deemed best not
to publicize this tiny list.
It is also seems that the only way for
a given Palestinian prisoner to be included in AI's action list
is to lobby the organization. This stands in stark contrast with
the adoption of Cuban POCs. There are thousands of Palestinians
in prisons, at the notorious secret prison Unit 1391 near Hadera,
and even in a concentration camp in the Negev [20]. AI has barely
moved pertaining the human rights of these people.
7b. Torture
AI's online archive on torture pertaining
to Israel-Palestine contains 43 items, but only 17 actually use
the word "torture." Out of these, six deal with the
issue of torture at any length, and the remainder mixes up torture
with denial of medical treatment or police brutality outside
of prison. All told there are about ten specific cases of torture
listed -- again, no accurate number can be put on this due to
the mixing up of cases dealing with torture, poor prison conditions,
denial of medical treatment and the like. AI has not produced
a specific report dealing with torture during the second intifada.
One must give AI credit on one count,
i.e., it actually named one Israeli torturer, Carmi Gillon, before
he became the Israeli ambassador to Denmark. The press release
offers some details of the torture techniques and the numbers
of prisoners tortured [21]. Despite this exposure, Gillon became
Israel's ambassador, and now attends cocktail parties in the
diplomatic circuit -- an unrepentant torturer who advocates the
use of more torture.
7c. Ethnic cleansing
The phrase "ethnic cleansing"
did not appear in AI's public record during 2002 and 2003. The
very best way to describe Israeli policy against the Palestinians
is to label it ethnic cleansing. The construction of the grotesque
wall deep in the West Bank is a blatant land grab and ethnic
cleansing operation. It is throwing thousands of Palestinians
off the land, and it clearly amounts to ethnic cleansing, or
the precursor to ethnocide. These are true crimes against humanity,
yet AI doesn't mention anything about ethnic cleansing.
It is true that "ethnic cleansing"
is a recently-coined term, but today its meaning is well understood,
i.e., the expulsion of large numbers of inhabitants from their
homes due to violence, intimidation or starvation. The term doesn't
appear in the core humanitarian law, but it conveys the understood
reality on the ground. Even Israeli scholars use this term to
describe Israeli military practices [22]. AI has a choice of
being legalistic or conveying information that is readily available
and understood by a broad audience. Its current choice is somewhere
in between, and it chooses a legalistic approach when an issue
is contentious, e.g., ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
|
Caption: Nov. 5, 2003. An Israeli
bulldozer is uprooting the olive trees of Saleh Romi who lost
3.5 dunums of his land to the so-called fence between Bethlehem/Aida
refugee camp and the Gilo settlement. In the photo, Mr. Romi
tries to impede the destruction of his trees. Jeff Halper, from
the Israeli commission against house demolitions, calls this
"quiet ethnic cleansing."
Photo: Musa Alshaer; ©
2003
|
7d. Ethnic cleansing
within pre-1967 Israeli borders
It may be difficult for AI to send its
researchers into the Occupied Territories -- it is dangerous.
However, one can investigate ethnic cleansing within Israel proper;
one can even read about it in Haaretz. The Bedouins in
the Negev have been systematically rounded up, their homes demolished,
and their crops sprayed with herbicide by aircraft [23]. The
land-grab wall is isolating some Palestinian communities in Israel
proper, and the inhabitants have been threatened with expulsion.
Ethnic cleansing is all too evident, but this isn't something
AI wants to investigate, let alone name it for what it is.
The village of Mazmuriah inside Israel
had until recently a "non-status" where the residents
were given West Bank identity cards [24]. When the wall was built
it shut the village off from contact with the neighboring villages,
and consequently the village lost access to basic services and
contact with their main neighbors. The next step in the Israeli
campaign was to order these people to leave. If this isn't ethnic
cleansing, then what is? This operation is easy to verify because
it is within Israel. The situation is much worse within the occupied
territories, and although less accessible, AI doesn't mention
"ethnic cleansing" (with or without quotation marks).
7e. Massacre
There are no references to the term "massacre"
in AI literature -- the word is considered political. Maybe a
dictionary definition is more useful, i.e., "to kill indiscriminately
or in large numbers." More than 2,600 Palestinians have
been killed, yet, according to AI, none were killed in a massacre.
Or as an AI press release put it: "[Irene Khan, AI's Secretary
General,] also clarified that there is no legal definition in
international law of the word 'massacre' and that its use in
the current circumstances is not helpful" [25]. Of course,
there is no legal definition of "ethnic cleansing"
either. It is curious that AI is willing to spew this legalese
when it suits them; obviously, it is using the term "crimes
against humanity" without much reference to any legal codex.
Here the usage of the term suits their ends, and there is no
need to be punctilious about legal definitions.
Here is another AI tendency: the usage
of euphemisms. Faced with questions about Jenin in April 2002,
AI had this to say: "Secretary General Irene Khan has confirmed
that there is strong evidence indicating that grave breaches
of international humanitarian law and violations of human rights
in Jenin camp were committed by the Israel Defense Force. (emphasis
added)." Legal experts confirm that such breaches amount
to war crimes or worse. Thus, when it comes to Israeli crimes
AI has a tendency of using euphemisms.
The rape analogy may be useful again.
In the case of a man raping a woman at knifepoint AI's position
amounts to avoiding the issue by stating: "there is no definition
of 'knifepoint' in law and its use in the current circumstances
is not helpful; this situation is not really a rape."
AI doesn't deem it necessary to deal with issues that don't fall
within the strict confines of its semi-legal discourse.
8. They have their
comical moments too
AI is neither a pacifist nor an anti-war
organization. Thus when an Israeli F16 dropped a one-ton-bomb
in a densely populated refugee camp in Gaza on July 23, 2002,
killing 17 people, the extent of its admonishment was: "This
attack was disproportionate and is utterly unacceptable. [26]"
Perhaps next time the IOF will oblige and use a 500kg bomb to
fulfill AI's suggestion for a proportionate response. Perhaps
this is why AI wants to hire military experts -- to determine
if actions are "proportionate."
The IOF also uses weapons that result
in indiscriminate killings when used in densely populated areas.
A flechette shell was used against a family sleeping in a tent
next to their orchard in Gaza and several people were killed.
The flechettes spread over a wide area and thus kill indiscriminately.
It would seem that the use of such a weapon is possibly criminal
in the Occupied Territories, but the response of an AI's researcher
to this was: "AI is not an anti-war organization."
This is their rationale for not issuing a condemnation about
the use of such weaponry. They understand the uses of weaponry,
and then they seek to hire military experts to determine if the
use of a given weapon was appropriate [27].
In October 2003, a helicopter attack
in Gaza fired flechette missile into a large crowd killing 14
civilians [28]. The mere fact Israel tried to cover up this incident
with false video footage is proof they know what they are doing
is morally at par with the suicide bombings. The difference is
that Israelis know that the destructiveness of their bombs is
much higher. AI's reaction: not a peep, although they may be
consulting with their military experts.
Any time there is a question about AI's
stance the rape analogy is useful. In the case of a man raping
a woman at knifepoint, AI's stance amounts to suggesting that
the rapist should "use a knife with a smaller blade."
AI will duly provide a military expert to determine if the length
of the knife blade is proportionate.
9. A double standard
AI's reaction to suicide bombings is
different from its reactions to a one-ton bomb dropped by an
F16 in the middle of a refugee camp. Most press releases dealing
with suicide bombs use emotive language; here one will find words
like "horrific" or "shocking." When it comes
to F16-one-ton-bombs there is no such emotive language. (Incidentally,
it is interesting to note that there is no legal definition of
'horrific' or 'shocking,' but when it comes to criticizing Palestinians,
that is no bar to AI.)
Furthermore, one wonders why AI condemns
the use of suicide bombings at all. Or as Prof. Nabeel Abraham
put it: "If AI is not an anti-war organization then it has
NO business criticizing suicide bombings which are merely human-delivered
bombs and keeping quiet about aerial and artillery delivered
bombs targeted on civilian areas. They are the same thing on
one level; the technology is vastly different; but a flechette
shell or an F16-delivered bomb is only different from a suicide
bomb in the tonnage and accuracy, that's all. So, if AI deems
suicide bombings to be crimes against humanity, what about the
F16-one-ton-bomb?"
10. Touch With a Bargepole
Sections of AI's reports are used by
both Palestinians and Israelis for their own purposes. One can
find references to Amnesty reports in many pro-Palestinian publications,
e.g., electronicIntifada, Palestine Chronicle, etc. Whenever
there is a reference to "Israeli war crimes," it is
deemed useful for their cause, and a given report or press release
may be quoted. Most people concerned with Palestinian human rights
don't realize or ignore that the same report usually contains
statements that are injurious to Palestinians.
During the Israeli onslaught on Jenin
in April 2002, the "IDF" website carried a justification
of their actions and stated that anyone reading AI's reports
would know what Israelis were up against -- Palestinians had
after all committed war crimes [29]. Amnesty's documents are
so useful, even the Israelis like them!
Peace or human rights activists should
treat AI documents carefully. There is a serious problem with
using a given document if there are dubious sections. For example,
one should not use a document condemning Israeli war crimes if
it also includes references to Palestinian "crimes against
humanity." Similarly, one cannot refer to any "good"
AI reports if it also produces others that are unfair to Palestinians.
What is needed is for Amnesty to clarify its stance in this conflict
and to produce consistent reports covering a wider array of issues.
If this is not forthcoming, then activists are advised to ignore
AI's reports -- they should avoid a "pick and choose"
approach to human rights. Simply put: AI cannot be all things
to all people -- something it attempts to do at present.
11. Action!
A recent mailing requesting donations
for Amnesty showed a prominent "Action!" slogan. Upon
opening the leaflet one found an array of options to donate money
to AI. Action equates to donating money to AI.
Browsing AI's website takes one to a
section where one can read about a given case of a hapless prisoner,
and then one can press a petition button. Presto! A liberal soul
will now feel much better. One can now go to the next case and
press another button for further liberal gratification. Amnesty
should perhaps provide one button that will sign the petitions
for all cases in one shot. Then, instead of wasting time
reading all the individual cases AI could direct volunteers to
read something more meaningful about human rights abuses. However,
this piecemeal, one-case-at-a-time approach misses the big picture
entirely, and goes to the heart of its failure in covering the
Israeli-Palestinian situation. Instead of focusing on the individual
prisoner, perhaps it would be far better to motivate activists
with an explanation of why violence, torture or other human rights
abuses occur in the first place. Activists armed with such information
will tend to be more active and committed to fight human rights
abuses, and may find more effective ways to act. Sending a regular
contribution to AI or pressing the silly buttons on its website
are hardly something that equates to "action." In reality,
AI's approach translates to a neutralizing of protest; it channels
idealistic people with a desire to change things into activities
that are of limited use.
Next time an AI letter comes through
the letterbox, cross out all parts having to do with fundraising.
Now, read the remainder and determine if you've obtained any
insight into why human rights have been violated in the cases
in question. It is unlikely that you will have done so. It is
also unlikely that the letter will state anything about the mass
abuse of Palestinian human rights.
12. Oh, we are so
apolitical
AI justifies its stance on the basis
that it is an apolitical organization. However, this apolitical
posturing is a smokescreen behind which hides a political organization
willing to play along with the propaganda needs of major powers.
This means that it will lend itself to issuing reports tarnishing
the accepted enemies, and it will neuter criticism of accepted
allies [30]. In the case of Israel-Palestine, this results in
minimizing and circumscribing criticism of Israel, and removing
any critical sting. At the same time, AI is willing to criticize
Palestinians and tarnish them with accusations of very serious
crimes. Above all its function is to de-legitimize Palestinian
violence.
When AI is willing to issue human rights
reports that lend themselves to propaganda campaigns on the eve
of war, and when it is unwilling to be more critical of official
allies, then it is up to the US and UK governments to foot AI's
bills; it is no longer the responsibility of the public at large
to do so.
13. Where was AI when
the ethnic cleansing was going on?
It took years for AI to finally recognize
a handful of Palestinian prisoners of conscience, it took decades
to recognize the Israeli torture practices, and it took decades
before AI ever uttered the term "war crimes" as a label
for Israeli actions. Even when it used such terms it did so in
an ambivalent fashion and with a frequency resembling the sexual
habits of Pandas -- it seldom occurs, and then when it happens
it is difficult to determine if it really happened. AI's current
stance indicates that it is possible to go through the motions,
use the "human rights" jargon and produce statements
that are supposedly useful to Israelis and Palestinians. In reality,
its stance vis-à-vis the Palestinians is biased, ineffective,
confused and sometimes injurious. In the face of on going ethnic
cleansing AI waits hundreds of days to issue reports, and it
barely raises its voice pertaining the systematic and mass abuses
of human rights. It is a shameful stance.
To clarify Amnesty's position on Israel-Palestine,
the rape analogy is again useful. The Israeli onslaught against
the Palestinians and the decades of dispossession are equivalent
to the gang rape of a woman held at knifepoint. While this is
going on Amnesty's role is akin to standing on the sidelines
wringing its hands and bleating occasionally: "both sides
must make human rights central to their relationship," "this
activity is making the woman uncomfortable," "the rapists
must freeze all f***ing activity," and "resisting the
rapists constitutes a crime against humanity."
Paul de Rooij
is a writer living in London, and is a former supporter of Amnesty
Intl. He can be reached at proox@hotmail.com
(NB: all emails with attachments will be automatically deleted.)
Endnotes
[1] "Amnesty on Jenin": an
interview with Prof. Francis Boyle by Dennis Bernstein, CAQ,
Summer 2002, pp. 9 -- 12, 27. The
online version can be found here.
[2] Diana Johnstone, Fools' Crusade,
Pluto Press, London, 2002. Her account is specific to the role
played by Human Rights Watch and AI prior to the war against
Serbia. However, exactly the same situation arose when, prior
the Gulf War in 1991, AI issued a report propagating the "throwing-the-babies-out-of-the-incubators"
hoax. AI never issued an apology for misleading the public or
playing along in that propaganda fabrication. See the Boyle interview
by Dennis Bernstein -- listed above. Finally, Sara Flounders
paints an equally bleak picture of the motivations behind HRW
attempts to bury any report on the Israeli attack on Jenin (see
"Further reading" list).
[3] Thalif Deen, Israeli Abuses the Worst
in 35 Years--U.N. Report, CommonDreams,
November 6, 2003.
[4] Wanton destruction constitutes a
war crime, MDE 15-091-2003, October 13, 2003.
[5] In previous reports or press releases
AI avoided using "war crimes." Thus it referred to
violations of international law/Fourth Geneva Conventions, violations
of policing standards, and it stated that a given action "would
constitute a war crime." When AI finally adopted this nomenclature,
it opted to lessen the impact of its criticism of Israelis by
accusing Palestinians of more serious crimes.
[6] For example see: Surviving under
siege, MDE 15-001-2003, September 8, 2003. There is one reference
to "war crimes", but it is generic.
[7] Some AI personnel make a curious
distinction about leveling an accusation at a group of people
and their actions. For some reason they argue that there is a
useful distinction between accusing of raping a woman and accusing
the person of being a rapist. It is difficult to see if this
distinction has any use. The information for this was derived
from a private communication.
[8] Ibid, Oct. 13, 2003.
[9] "Forcible transfers of Palestinians
to Gaza constitutes a War Crime," MDE 15-134-2002, September
3, 2002.
[10] Surviving under siege, MDE 15-001-2003,
September 9, 2003.
[11] This is the list of AI reports.
NB: reports dealing with the abuse of Israeli human rights were
excluded - for an explanation see my previous article. Also note
that AI never issued a report on the situation in Jenin in 2002.
|
Date |
Name
of Report |
Reference
Number |
| 14-Oct--00 |
Excessive Use
of Lethal Force |
MDE 15-41-00 |
| 10-Nov-00 |
Mass arrests and
police brutality |
MDE 15-58-2000 |
| 01-Feb-01 |
State Assassinations
and Other Unlawful Killings |
MDE 15-005-2001 |
| 15-Aug-01 |
Broken Lives:
a year of intifada |
MDE 15-083-2001 |
| 12-Apr-02 |
The heavy price
of Israeli incursions |
MDE 15-042-2002 |
| 23-May-02 |
Mass detention
in cruel, inhuman [...] conditions |
MDE 15-074-2002 |
| 30-Sep-02 |
Killing the Future:
Children in the line of fire |
MDE 02-005-2002 |
| 04-Nov-02 |
Shielded from
scrutiny |
MDE 15-143-2002 |
| 08-Sep-03 |
Surviving under
siege |
MDE 15-001-2003 |
[12] By this is meant that AI hasn't
issued a report -- a detailed investigation of the topics mentioned.
When this article was nearly finished AI issued a press release
about the land-grab wall, but it didn't go into details or implications.
[13] One doesn't have to restrict one's
view to Sabra and Shatila to determine that Ariel Sharon is a
mass criminal. To dispel the notion that Sharon may be a "man
of peace," one should read Azmi Bishara's "A lifetime
credo," (Al
Ahram, September 4, 2003, issue 654).
[14] Ronnie Kasrils' statement at a conference
in London, Fall 2002. Please note that Ronnie Kasrils is Jewish
himself.
[15] Surviving under siege, MDE 15-001-2003,
September 8, 2003.
[16] Lisa Hajjar, "Legal Discourses
and Conflict in Israel-Palestine," Chapter 2 in Courting
Conflict: The Israeli Military Court System in the West Bank
and Gaza, forthcoming University of California Press, available here.)
[17] Nabeel Abraham, et al., International
Human Rights Organizations and the Palestine Question, Middle
East Report (MERIP), Vol. 18, No. 1, January-February 1988,
pp. 12 -- 20. Available
online here.
[18] Nabeel Abraham, Torture Anyone?
Lies of Our Times, May 1992, pp. 2 - 4. Available
online here.
[19] "Possible" prisoner of
conscience is an odd concept. It seems that the canonizing committee
couldn't make up its mind on these cases. In similar circumstances,
the Vatican should create one category of saints, and another
for "possible" saints.
[20] Jonathan Cook, "Facility 1391:
Israel's Guantanamo," Le Monde Diplomatique, November
2003.
[21] "AI calls on Denmark to fulfil
its obligations under the UN Convention against Torture,"
MDE 15/074/2001, Aug. 14, 2001.
[22] Jeff Halper, Nov. 9, 2003 at a London
forum stated: "what we witness is quiet ethnic cleansing."
There are other Israeli scholars who have made similar statements.
[23] "Israel destroys Negev Bedouin
harvest with crop-dusters," online
here. For a long list of other ethnic cleansing incidents
in the Negev, see
here. Some Bedouin's villages don't even appear
on the map!
[24] Neve Gordon, "Land
Theft & Confinement: The Bad Fence," CounterPunch,
May 30, 2003.
[25] Press release: "Jenin: Israel
must answer questions", MDE 15-071-2002 April 29, 2002.
[26] "Killing Palestinian civilians
will not bring security or peace," MDE 15-122-2002, July
23, 2002. Even the title of this press release is odd.
[27] Here Human Rights Watch has actually
ventured a statement: "(Jerusalem, April 29 2003) The Israeli
army should immediately stop using US-supplied flechette shells
in the Gaza Strip, Human Rights Watch said today. The use of
such antipersonnel weapons in densely populated areas makes the
risk of civilian casualties intolerably high under international
law." However, the HRW language is also troubling; does
imply there is a "tolerance" for civilian casualties?
[28] Chris McGreal, "Israel
Admits It Lied Over Missile Raid on Camp," The Guardian,
Nov. 21, 2003.
[29] Unfortunately the webpage in question
has scrolled, and the website has been redesigned, and therefore
no record of this document remains.
[30] Anyone doubting this statement should
read the Summer 2002 CAQ interview with Prof. Francis Boyle.
It lists two egregious examples: the fact that AI issued a press
release condemning Iraqis about the throwing-the-babies-out-of-the-incubators
-- something proven to be a fabrication, and later prevaricating,
obstructing, and NOT issuing a report of its own on the attack
on Jenin in April 2002.
Further Reading
1. Nabeel Abraham, et al.; International
Human Rights Organizations and the Palestine Question, Middle
East Report (MERIP), Vol. 18, No. 1, January-February 1988,
pp. 12 -- 20. Available
online here.
2. Dennis Bernstein and Francis Boyle,
"Amnesty on Jenin": an interview, CAQ, Summer 2002,
pp. 9 -- 12, 27. Available
online here.
3. Paul de Rooij, "AI:
Say It Isn't So," CounterPunch, Oct. 31, 2002
4. Paul de Rooij, "Ambient
Death in Palestine," CounterPunch, June 26, 2003.
5. Sara Flounders, "Massacre
in Jenin, Human Rights Watch and the Stage-Management of Imperialism,"
CAQ, Fall 2002. Available online here.
6. Diana Johnstone, Fools' Crusade,
Pluto Press, London, 2002.
Weekend
Edition Features for Nov. 14 / 23, 2003
Alexander Cockburn
Clintontime:
Was It Really a Golden Age?
Saul Landau
Words
of War
Noam Chomsky
Invasion
as Marketing Problem: Iraq War and Contempt for Democracy
Stan Goff
An Open Letter to GIs in Iraq: Hold on to Your Humanity
Jeffrey St. Clair
Bush Puts Out a Contract on the Spotted Owl
John Holt
Blue Light: Battle for the Sweetgrass Hills
Adam Engel
A DC Lefty in King George's Court: an Interview with Sam Smith
Joanne Mariner
In a Dark Hole: Moussaoui and the Hidden Detainees
Uri Avnery
The General as Pseudo-Dove: Ya'alon's 70 Virgins
M. Shahid Alam
Voiding the Palestinians: an Allegory
Juliana Fredman
Visions of Concrete
Norman Solomon
Media Clash in Brazil
Brian Cloughley
Is Anyone in the Bush Administration Telling the Truth?
William S. Lind
Post-Machine Gun Tactics
Patrick W. Gavin
Imagine
Dave Lindorff
Bush's
Brand of Leadership: Putting Himself First
Tom Crumpacker
Pandering to Anti-Castro Hardliners
Erik Fleming
Howard Dean's Folly
Rick Giombetti
Challenging the Witch Doctors of the New Imperialism: a Review
of Bush in Babylon
Jorge Mariscal
Las Adelitas, 2003: Mexican-American Women in Iraq
Chris Floyd
Logical Conclusions
Mickey Z.
Does William Safire Need Mental Help?
David Vest
Owed to the Confederate Dead
Ron Jacobs
Joe: the Sixties Most Unforgiving Film
Dave Zirin
Foreman and Carlos: a Tale of Two Survivors
Poets' Basement
Guthrie, Albert, Greeder, Ghalib and Alam
Keep CounterPunch
Alive:
Make
a Tax-Deductible Donation Today Online!
home / subscribe
/ about us / books
/ archives / search
/ links /
|