Love of the Land: HRW New Middle East Board: Reinforcing the Bias

HRW New Middle East Board: Reinforcing the Bias

Gerald M. Steinberg
Executive Director, NGO Monitor
Hudson New York
12 November 09

In the face of intense criticism of its Middle East activities, Human Rights Watch has expanded itsMiddle East and North Africa (MENA) advisory board with the addition of ten members, largely based in the Middle East. While some are human rights activists in their own countries, (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, etc.), including woman’s rights, many also contribute significantly to targeting Israel through the language of human rights.

In particular, the addition of Ms. Asli Bali, and Aeyal Gross, who is known as an opponent of Israeli policies, will reinforce the political agenda of MENA heads Sara Leah Whitson and Joe Stork, as documented in NGO Monitor’s detailed analysis, “Experts or Ideologues?”. These changes reflect and strengthen what founderRobert Bernstein criticized as HRW’s role in “turning Israel into a pariah state”, as well as HRW’s role in ‘lawfare’, including the intensive promotion of the Goldstone Report. (Goldstone is closely linked to HRW, and was a member of the board until after his appointment to head the UNHRC’s “fact finding mission”.)

Another point of interest is the inclusion of Ahmad Zuaiter, who is a portfolio manager at Soros Fund Management. Soros’ Open Society Institute has become a major source of funding for HRW and for a number of other organizations that promote anti-Israel boycotts.

In terms of anti-Israel bias, the most problematic new members of HRW’s MENA board are:

1) Ms. Asli Bali -- editorial board of MERIP, a radical anti-Israel group (founded by MENA division deputy director Joe Stork in the 1970s); heads Princeton Committee on Palestine, whichparticipated in “ Israeli Apartheid Week”, co-sponsored Norman Finkelstein and ...

More »

Love of the Land: HRW New Middle East Board: Reinforcing the Bias

Love of the Land: NGO Monitor report: Experts or Ideologues?

NGO Monitor report: Experts or Ideologues?

A Systematic Analysis of HRW's Focus on Israel

On September 8, 2009, NGO Monitor released a research report – Experts or Ideologues? A Systematic Analysis of Human Rights Watch’s Focus on Israel – examining HRW’s publications and campaigns related to Israel from 2001 to 2009.

This report is the most detailed analysis of HRW that has been published to date, revealing a consistent pattern of double standards, inconsistencies, and exploitation of human rights to attack Israel.

The report consists of three sections:
1) An examination of key HRW staff members – their professional backgrounds, research expertise, and ideological bias concerning Israel, including:

• Ken Roth
• Sarah Leah Whitson
• Joe Stork
• Marc Garlasco
• Reed Brody

2) Five detailed HRW case studies which show:

• Consistent bias
• False and contradictory claims
• Reliance on irrelevant “evidence”
• Speculation disguised as fact
• Inappropriate methodologies (“eyewitness testimony,” NGO and media reports, and “weapons assessments” that are neither credible nor verifiable).

3) A broader quantitative analysis of HRW publications from 2001 to 2009, showing greatly disproportionate emphasis on Israel in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Division, double standards in the use of terminology such as “war crimes,” “collective punishment,” etc., and in highly distorted uses of international legal terminology.

PDF of the full report

Executive summary [PDF]

Click here for further analysis of Human Rights Watch and excerpts of the report

Love of the Land: NGO Monitor report: Experts or Ideologues?

Love of the Land: The Wrath of Ken Roth: Human Rights Watch, Goldstone and Israel

The Wrath of Ken Roth: Human Rights Watch, Goldstone and Israel

by Gerald M. Steinberg
Executive Director, NGO Monitor

1 September 09

At a conference in Europe, Sa’ad Eddin Ibrahim, the respected Egyptian human rights activist, stopped abruptly in the middle of his presentation to embrace Prof. Irwin Cotler, who had just arrived. Prof. Cotler had been active in the fight to secure Ibrahim’s freedom from jail on trumped-up charges -- one of many such battles that the former Canadian Justice Minister has led, including in behalf of Natan Sharansky, Nelson Mandela, and Ethiopian Jews.

For this and many other reasons, readers should add more than the usual grain of salt in reading Kenneth Roth’s diatribe (Jerusalem Post, August 26). As head of Human Rights Watch (HRW) since 1993, Roth’s accomplishments do not come close to Prof. Cotler’s. Instead, Roth has led the politicization and erosion of universal human rights as a moral force.

The main focus of Roth’s attack is to defend the legitimacy of Judge Richard Goldstone, the head of the United Nations “fact finding mission” whose report on the Gaza war is expected to be released soon. But in his tirade, Roth forgot to disclose his relationship with Goldstone - a long-time member of HRW’s board. And in many ways, the attempts to malign and disparage Goldstone’s critics are also part of efforts by Roth to defend himself and HRW.

Indeed, as Goldstone is discredited, Roth has good reason to worry. The appointment of Goldstone was another step in the strategy adopted by the 2001 Durban NGO Forum, with the goal of isolating Israelthrough the language of human rights. NGO Monitor’s detailed research shows that HRW has promoted this strategy by issuing at least 68 calls for “independent investigations” of Israel -- including Jenin (2002), Rafah (2004), the Gaza Beach incident, and the Lebanon war (2006). Roth lamely sought to avoid the evidence of targeting Israel, rather than doing more on human rights in Iran, Africa, or Libya: “we’ve got to pick and choose—we’ve got finite resources.”

The Gaza war gave Roth the opportunity to expand these efforts, and HRW worked closely with the UN Human Rights Council, dominated by Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Cuba, Russia, China, and Egypt, in creating the “independent inquiry” headed by one of its own - Judge Goldstone. Since then, HRW has provided the investigators and the accompanying media campaign with three more tendentious “reports” accusing Israeli forces of “war crimes” during the war. (To claim “balance”, HRW also published a belated report on Hamas, omitting Iran’s role in supplying weapons and training. This follows HRW’s standard pattern, as seen during the suicide bombing campaign, and the 2006 Lebanon war.)

Read All at :

Love of the Land: The Wrath of Ken Roth: Human Rights Watch, Goldstone and Israel

Israel Matzav: Joe Stork's crime against humanity

Joe Stork's crime against humanity

You may recall that last Sunday I posted a translation of an article by Ben Dror Yemini from Friday's Ma'ariv that ripped the mask off Human Rights Watch's Joe Stork, who wrote the NGO's report on Operation Cast Lead that accused Israel of shooting eleven white-flag-bearing 'Palestinians' in seven separate incidents. Stork responded to Yemini's charges in a letter that was linked by Noah Pollak on Contentions on Saturday. In his Ma'ariv column on Friday, Ben Dror Yemini fisked Stork's letter. Here are some highlights (Hat Tip: Dave H). Stork's accusations are in italics and Yemini's response in normal font.

Read All at :

Israel Matzav: Joe Stork's crime against humanity

Israel Matzav: Author of Human Rights Watch report against Israel supported Munich Olypmic Massacre

Author of Human Rights Watch report against Israel supported Munich Olypmic Massacre

I discussed Joe Stork, the author of the Human Rights Watch report that condemned Israel's actions in Operation Cast Lead here. That post included a very brief discussion of Stork's pre-Human Rights Watch career.

Sunday's Hebrew daily Ma'ariv rips the mask off Stork, showing him to be a strong supporter of 'Palestinian' terror and of Saddam Hussein (link in Hebrew).

Several times in the past, Stork has called for the destruction of Israel and is a veteran supporter of Palestinian terrorism. Already as a student, Stork was amongst the founders of a new radical leftist group, which was formed based on the claim that other leftist groups were not sufficiently critical of Israel and of the United States’ support of it. Already in 1976, Stork participated in a conference organized by Saddam Hussein which celebrated the first anniversary of the UN decision that equated Zionism with racism. Stork, needless to say, arrived at the conference as a prominent supporter of Palestinian terrorism and as an opponent to the existence of the State of Israel.

He also labeled Palestinian violence against Israel as “revolutionary potential of the Palestinian masses” – language that was typical of fanatical Marxists.

Read All at :

Israel Matzav: Author of Human Rights Watch report against Israel supported Munich Olypmic Massacre