Watchdog lambastes Washington's 'hypocrisy'


	January 18, 2002	atimes.com

Central Asia/Russia

Watchdog lambastes Washington's 'hypocrisy'
By Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON - Hypocrisy characterized much of US human rights policy during George W Bush's first year as president, particularly in his war against terrorism following the September 11 attacks in the United States, according to Human Rights Watch (HRW). In its "2002 World Report" released here on Wednesday, the New York-based group charged that Bush's anti-terrorist campaign "risks reinforcing the logic of terrorism unless human rights are given a far more central role".

Bush's support for repressive allies in the Middle East, North Africa, and Central Asia, his softening of criticism for Russia's repression in Chechnya, and his relative indifference to violent abuses against civilians in other regions of the world, particularly Africa, showed double standards which only foster resentment abroad, according to the report.

"As seen from Washington, violence becomes intolerable based not on WHETHER civilians are attacked but on WHOSE civilians are attacked and who is doing the attacking," noted the report which added that other Western nations tended to follow Washington's lead. "Such a message hardly helps to build broad support for human rights."

Moreover, post-September 11 curbs on civil liberties here at home - especially Bush's authorization for military commissions to try suspected terrorist leaders and the singling out of young men from the Middle East and North Africa for special attention by law enforcement agencies - undermined Washington's credibility as a force for human rights, HRW said.

The 670-page report, which includes summaries of important human rights developments from November 2000 through November 2001 in 66 countries around the world, stressed that there were major advances in the human-rights field, as well as serious setbacks arising in particular from the ongoing anti-terrorist campaign, during the year.

On the positive side, according to the report, the surrender of former Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic for trial before the International Criminal Tribunal at the Hague; the indictment in Chile of former president Augusto Pinochet; and the judicial decision in Argentina that invalidated the country's amnesty laws were among the more positive events in the year. The report also noted the rapid progress made toward the creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC), with 47 of the 60 needed countries having ratified the treaty; the entry into force of the protocol outlawing the use of child soldiers; the highlighting of caste-based discrimination at the World Conference Again Racism; and the speed and success with which the international community defused looming ethnic conflict in Macedonia as major achievements in 2001.

It said the demise of the "abysmal" Taliban regime in Afghanistan "creates an opportunity for positive change" but added that the international community must ensure that Western-backed victors there in the US-led war on terrorism break with their own record of past "atrocities" and that those responsible are kept out of power.

The negative side of the ledger was also pretty full, however. Aside from the human rights issues raised by the war against terrorism, HRW pointed to the slow progress in creating war crimes trials in Cambodia and Sierra Leone; the failure to bring to justice the architects of the 1999 atrocities in East Timor; and the continuing suffering of civilians in civil wars and political violence in Algeria, Angola, Burundi, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Indonesia, and Sudan.

HRW also scored the failure of trade ministers at the World Trade Organization meeting in Qatar in November to give the protection of labor rights a significant place on the agenda for a new round of global trade negotiations to be launched this year.

But the main concern of this year's report was the many impacts of the war against terrorism on respect for human rights. At the core of any successful fight against terrorism, according to the report, must be strong adherence to fundamental human rights principles, beginning with the rejection of the basic tenet of terrorism itself: that the killing of civilians may be an acceptable political act.

"The fight against terror must reaffirm the principle that no civilian should ever be deliberately killed or abused," according to HRW's executive director, Kenneth Roth. "But for too many countries," he added, "the anti-terror mantra has provided a new reason to ignore human rights."

In particular, the war against terrorism has already led to "opportunistic attacks" on civil liberties by many have which enlisted in the US-led "coalition", mainly by touting their own internal struggles as battles against terrorism, according to the report. Thus, China has depicted its repression of Uighur dissidents in Xinjiang province as part of the anti-terrorist struggle; Egypt has suggested its harsh measures against Islamists, which have included torture and summary military courts, as a possible "new model"; while Israel has repeatedly argued that it faces in the 16-month-old Palestinian intifada its own terrorist war which justifies tough retaliation, including selected assassinations against the uprising's suspected leaders.

Russia's efforts to frame its brutal war in Chechnya have been particularly successful, according to HRW. Not only has Washington muffled its criticism, but key European governments, including Germany and Italy, have argued publicly that Moscow's counterinsurgency efforts should be reassessed in light of alleged ties between Chechen rebels and the Al-Qaeda network, which Washington charges organized the September 11 attacks.

Washington's new coziness with certain Central Asian states which have provided it with bases from which to launch attacks on Afghanistan further illustrates what HRW refers to as "the selectivity of concern with attacks on civilians".

Uzbekistan, which has ruthlessly suppressed Muslims who have tried to practice their faith outside of state controls, is poised to receive sharply increased US military and economic aid in return for its cooperation, but there are as yet no signs that Washington will use that leverage to press for improvements in the government's human rights record.

The same applies to much of the Middle East and North Africa where the failure of Washington and other Western governments to press repressive governments to end their abuses has inhibited the growth of a "culture of human rights as an antidote to terrorism", the report said.

"In societies where basic freedoms flourish, citizens can press their government to respond to grievances," said Roth. "But in Saudi Arabia and other countries where Osama bin Laden strikes a chord of resentment, governments prohibit political debate. As the option of peaceful political change is closed off, the voices of non-violent dissent are frequently upstaged by advocates of violent opposition," he added.

Moreover, Washington's failure to rein in Israeli abuse of Palestinians or to restructure UN economic sanctions to minimize suffering of Iraqi citizens suggest to many in the region "that the West's commitment to human rights is one of convenience, to be forsaken when abuses are committed by an ally or in the name of containing a foe", according to the report.

(Inter Press Service)