fbpx

Human Rights Tragedies and Distortions

December 10 is known as International Human Rights Day, commemorating the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations in 1948.
[additional-authors]
December 8, 2014

December 10 is known as International Human Rights Day, commemorating the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations in 1948.  The Declaration stresses equality before the law; due process rights; freedom of thought, conscience, and religion; and the right to earn a livelihood. Although it is non-binding, the declaration has spawned a host of human rights treaties and greater attention to civil equality, labor rights, and environment-related rights. 

Sadly, the universality envisioned by the Declaration has not been achieved. In all too many parts of the world, human rights are nonexistent.

Moreover, as concern for human rights has grown, rights-based language has been hijacked or “weaponized”: Many political advocates exploit human rights principles and terminology to advance narrow political goals and attack ideological adversaries, abandoning the universality of human rights. These campaigns, unsurprisingly, result in fewer human rights protections.

This troubling phenomenon is a visible part of the Arab-Israeli conflict. A powerful network of NGOs uses human rights and related concepts of international law to demonize Israel and advance campaigns of isolation and sanctions.  While ostensibly aimed at promoting the human rights of Palestinians, these actions often weaken Palestinian rights while completely ignoring the rights of Israelis. 

Amnesty International, one of the largest and most powerful non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that claim a focus on human rights, with an annual budget approaching $100 million, is a case in point. Instead of confronting abuses by ISIS or Boko Haram, groups that torment women and minorities in unspeakable ways, this week Amnesty will mark International Human Rights Day by yet again accusing Israel of “war crimes” for its efforts to stop Hamas rocket and tunnel attacks on Israeli civilians.

In its publication, Amnesty levies unsupported allegations that, amidst the fighting in Gaza this summer, Israel deliberately destroyed “landmark buildings” and targeted civilians. This is the second such major document in as many months attacking Israel on relatively minor aspects of the Gaza conflict; a November publication, despite lacking evidence, also accused Israel of exacting a “devastating toll on civilians and civilian property.”

From a certain perspective, this parade of publications on Israel and Gaza is to be expected.  Amnesty played a primary role in the Goldstone process following the 2009 Gaza war, providing the list of incidents that Judge Goldstone discussed in his discredited report (none involved Hamas). Amnesty also campaigned publically in support of the mission and its skewed conclusions. With the Schabas Report (aka Goldstone 2) forthcoming in March 2015, Amnesty is actively working to construct a false narrative of Israeli guilt.

In contrast, Amnesty has issued no such detailed reports on Hamas attacks against Israel civilians or on its war strategy of operating out of residential areas to maximize Palestinian civilian damage. As previous rounds of conflicts and condemnations have shown, by ignoring Hamas abuses, Amnesty encourages the terrorist organization to operate from homes, schools, mosques, and hospitals – making future violations of Palestinian rights more likely.

Unfortunately, Amnesty is not alone in the damage caused by the exploitation of rights rhetoric for narrow political agendas.

Human rights distortions are also present in the boycott campaign against SodaStream, a company that manufactures home carbonation systems. It has six manufacturing facilities, with one production plant located in the West Bank. Because SodaStream is a popular product and ran high-profile ads during the Super Bowl, anti-Israel NGO activists target the company. The political objective, to punish private business activity allegedly connected to the “occupation,” is obvious. 

However, from a human rights perspective, the targeting of SodaStream is perplexing. The company employs hundreds of Palestinians at a good wage and in respectable labor conditions. Its reusable product is more environmentally friendly than bottled soft drink options. Seeking to cause the company economic damage could result in the loss of thousands of jobs. Closing the plant in the West Bank, specifically, will deprive nearly 1,000 Palestinians and their families of livelihoods.

NGO campaigners cannot explain why they ignore these aspects or how their dogmatic political goals justifies the violation of the economic, social, labor, and environmental rights caused by their activism. 

In another situation, anti-Israel boycott activists and the Dutch government targeted the company Royal Haskoning DHV, pushing it to cancel its involvement in constructing a sewage treatment facility in East Jerusalem. The plant would have significantly remediated the severely polluted Kidron Valley, home to many Palestinian villages. Yet, the NGO activists and Dutch officials were obsessed with the location of the plant and completely ignored the rights of Palestinians and Israelis regarding health, clean water, and a pollution-free environment. 

As these examples demonstrate, actualizing rights in the context of the Arab-Israeli conflict is complex, and cannot be reduced to slogans and advocacy campaigns.

However, for narrow-minded actors, including many NGOs, political abstractions are far more important than the concrete realization of human rights. Too often, their political considerations and agendas trump human rights and cause the very damage they claim to combat.

And that is a tragedy.

Naftali Balanson and Anne Herzberg are the managing editor and legal advisor, respectively, at NGO Monitor (www.ngo-monitor.org), a Jerusalem-based research institute. 

Did you enjoy this article?
You'll love our roundtable.

Editor's Picks

Latest Articles

More news and opinions than at a
Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.

More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.