Dating former services sex yugoslav
Since the early 1990s this tendency has been especially marked in the organization’s focus on and treatment of some of the major contests in which the U. government itself has been engaged—perhaps none more clearly than Iraq and the Balkans.
Here, its deep bias is well-illustrated in a March 2002 op-ed by HRW’s executive director, Kenneth Roth, published in the Wall Street Journal under the title “Indict Saddam.” The first thing to note about this commentary is its timing.
Given that HRW’s own state is the one that has been carrying out serial wars in violation of the UN Charter, the exclusion of this primary cause of human rights violations in itself compromises any neutrality the organization may claim to observe.
Sign up now to contact hundreds of thousands of quality nudists/naturists!
Human Rights Watch (HRW) came into existence in 1978 as the U. S.-based organization whose vice chairman once stated “You can’t complain about other countries unless you put your own house in order,” its main focus was on Moscow .
Early documents affirmed that its purpose was to “monitor domestic and international compliance with the human rights provisions of the Helsinki Final Act.” But though a private U.
Here again it is clear that Roth and HRW are not neutral, but, having internalized the perspectives of the Western powers, they serve aggression when carried out under the right auspices.
HRW not only overlooks the rule of law as regards aggression, it has never addressed the massive abuses of the judicial process in the politicized work of the ICTY, apparently because it is serving the same cause as HRW.
We care deeply about the humanitarian consequences of war, but we avoid judgments on the legality of war itself because they tend to compromise the neutrality needed to monitor most effectively how the war is waged….” But this is a disingenuous evasion on multiple grounds.