Having worked for Human Rights Watch (HRW) for over a decade, Danielle Haas has seen up close how this supposedly neutral institution obsessively focuses on the real and imagined wrongdoings of the Jewish state, while too often giving short shrift to the most heinous abusers of human rights. The same, she writes, is true of other highly regarded self-appointed guardians of global morality, like Amnesty International and Doctors without Borders. Haas delves into the reasons:
Because NGOs follow a course set by an existing narrative, “evidence” has relative value. When Israel finds Hamas tunnels beneath children’s beds, or third-party investigations reveal that Israel did not cause the deadly October 17 blast at al-Ahli Hospital, these findings receive scant attention compared with Israeli abuses because, in the minds of NGOs and those who work for them, they are mere inconveniences to the prevailing narrative that Israel is fundamentally to blame.
NGOs are . . . dual actors. As activists, they have a mission to ensure that the message of so-called Israeli apartheid takes root in the wider world. But as self-described witnesses, they are dedicated to rigorous firsthand research that underpins their findings and recommendations. [But] the roles of activist and witness are fundamentally discordant. The former involves a ready-made mindset and imposition. The latter requires an open mind and exploration.
It’s instructive to understand that money and reputation are what are important to rights monitors. . . . Above all, this dynamic explains the futility of upbraiding NGOs to uphold their own standards and on-paper policies, and the inefficacy of proving they are unequal-opportunity accusers or anti-Semitic. Such strategies do not work because NGOs do not care—and do not have to. They answer to virtually no one.
Read more on Sapir: https://sapirjournal.org/friends-and-foes/2024/03/the-human-rights-establishment