Meet the American Empire's Favorite NGO: Human Rights Watch
http://www.alternet.org/world/how-human-rights-watch-serves-us-empire
Over more than a decade, the rise of the left in Latin American governance has led to remarkable advances in poverty alleviation, regional integration, and a reassertion of sovereignty and independence. The United States has been antagonistic toward the new left governments, and has concurrently pursued a bellicose foreign policy, in many cases blithely dismissive of international law.
So why has Human Rights Watch (HRW)despite proclaiming itself one of the worlds leading independent organizations on human rightsso consistently paralleled U.S. positions and policies? This affinity for the U.S. government agenda is not limited to Latin America. In the summer of 2013, for example, when the prospect of a unilateral U.S. missile strike on Syriaa clear violation of the UN Charterloomed large, HRWs executive director Kenneth Roth speculated as to whether a simply symbolic bombing would be sufficient. If Obama decides to strike Syria, will he settle for symbolism or do something that will help protect civilians? he asked on Twitter. Executive director of MITs Center for International Studies John Tirman swiftly denounced the tweet as possibly the most ignorant and irresponsible statement ever by a major human-rights advocate.[1]
HRWs accommodation to U.S. policy has also extended to renditionsthe illegal practice of kidnapping and transporting suspects around the planet to be interrogated and often tortured in allied countries. In early 2009, when it was reported that the newly elected Obama administration was leaving this program intact, HRWs then Washington advocacy director Tom Malinowski argued that under limited circumstances, there is a legitimate place for renditions, and encouraged patience: they want to design a system that doesnt result in people being sent to foreign dungeons to be tortured, he said, but designing that system is going to take some time.[2]
Similar consideration was not extended to de-facto U.S. enemy Venezuela, when, in 2012, HRWs Americas director José Miguel Vivanco and global advocacy director Peggy Hicks wrote a letter to President Hugo Chávez arguing that his country was unfit to serve on the UNs Human Rights Council. Councilmembers must uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights, they maintained, but unfortunately, Venezuela currently falls far short of acceptable standards.[3] Given HRWs silence regarding U.S. membership in the same council, one wonders precisely what HRWs acceptable standards are.