Posted on 08/06/2002 2:11:01 PM PDT by knighthawk
In 1961, activists from Belgium, Britain, France, Germany, Ireland, Switzerland and the United States established Amnesty International, a group they hoped would be "a permanent international movement in defence of freedom of opinion and religion." In the four decades since, AI has done much to fulfill its mandate, shining a spotlight into Third World dungeons and torture chambers, and publicizing the treatment of prisoners of conscience.
Unfortunately, AI has strayed in recent years. According to the group's Web site, its mission remains, in theory, to "free all prisoners of conscience; ensure fair and prompt trials for political prisoners; abolish the death penalty, torture and other cruel treatment of prisoners; end political killings and 'disappearances'; and oppose human rights abuses by opposition groups." But in practice, AI has begun to fritter away its well-earned moral capital on fashionable causes that have nothing to do with any of these issues.
For instance, some of AI's supporters were alienated when the group supported last year's disastrous UN "anti-racism" conference in Durban, South Africa. Of all the nations in the Middle East, Israel has by far the most humane and civilized justice system. Yet in Durban, Amnesty International singled out Israel for special blame. And the group refused to walk out on the proceedings even when the NGO conference degenerated into a festival of unvarnished anti-Semitism.
AI's anti-Western focus can be observed at home, too. Last month, the group submitted a brief to the UN purporting to describe discrimination against minorities in Canada. The material is thin gruel. AI complains, for instance, that British Columbia's recent referendum on aboriginal rights might generate "divisiveness," which could "exacerbate racial discrimination" and indirectly undermine affirmative action programs. Great concern is expressed over the Federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans' efforts to prevent Burnt Church, N.B., Indians from illegally snatching lobsters. And AI fears moves to keep bogus refugee applicants out of the country have led to the stereotyping of refugees "as being criminals, 'terrorists,' welfare-cheats and undesirables." Yet AI does not give a single example of how this alleged "stereotyping" has actually led to concrete human rights abuses. Nor does the group deal with the case of Ahmed Ressam, one of several Arab terrorists who used Canada as a base to plot attacks. Given the ease with which Mr. Ressam played the refugee system, it seems we require more vigilance, not less.
But these are details. The broader question is this: Given AI's mandate and limited resources, why is the group wasting its time and resources complaining about inconvenienced lobster thugs and "stereotyped" refugees when people are being butchered and railroaded en masse in places like Angola, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia? The answer is that it has become more politically fashionable to sniff for racism in the First World than to hunt for torture in the Third. Like Human Rights Watch and other brand-name NGOs, AI has been tempted away from its original mandate, and now fritters away its credibility attacking Zionism, globalization and the West.
We urge Amnesty's leaders to buck this trend and reclaim the group's original mission. If they do not, then AI's donors will eventually grow tired of financing an organization that professes to fight repression, but which instead has dedicated much of its effort to backbiting the world's democracies.
Not to mention Zimbabwe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.