Connect with us

RSS

Why Does Amnesty International Have Relevance for Views on Israel?

Amnesty International’s Secretary General Agnes Callamard, Middle East and North Africa Research and Advocacy Director Philip Luther and activist Orly Noy attend a press conference to announce the Amnesty International’s 211-page report named “Israel’s Apartheid Against Palestinians: Cruel System of Domination and Crime Against Humanity” at the St George Hotel, in eastern Jerusalem, February 1, 2022. REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun

On December 5, Amnesty International released a report accusing Israel of genocide. It begins with the Genocide Convention, then uses alleged evidence from hundreds of eye witnesses, satellite images, and statements of Israeli leaders in an attempt to prove that what Israel is doing meets the definition of genocide that the Geneva Convention spells out.

Many of Israel’s supporters are criticizing the content of the report, and Amnesty’s dismissal of Hamas’ responsibility for any of the tragedy that has unfolded in Gaza. But here’s a question that hasn’t been asked: Isn’t this a duplication of the exact work the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is supposed to be doing in the case brought against Israel by South Africa? All the rulings last winter and spring were preliminary, for the sole purpose of imposing temporary measures aimed at stabilizing the situation. In October, South Africa submitted its evidence of “genocide, “and now Israel has until next July 28 to reply.

So why did Amnesty release what is essentially its own opinion on how the ICJ should rule? One possibility is that they are so anxious to ratchet up political pressure on Israel, that they can’t wait for the ICJ. Or maybe they are afraid the ICJ will find Israel not guilty, and want to get their two cents in first. Or is their report an attempt to influence the final decision of the ICJ, laying out a roadmap for the ICJ to come to a guilty verdict?

However you cut it, it’s not good. Due process of law is a basic human right. This means that criminal guilt can only be decided by a fair and impartial court, not citizens, no matter how knowledgeable or fair they claim to be. So if an individual is accused of a crime, for some non-government organization to leap up and tell the world, “No need for a judge, Israel is guilty,” is wrong and a violation of the defendant’s rights. What’s true for an individual should also be true for a country.

The ICJ is already biased enough — as its own judges have pointed out. It’s highly likely they will find Israel falsely guilty of the absurd accusation of genocide. Yet that’s still not enough for Amnesty International.

The justice system, whether local or at the ICJ, is frustrating. It takes a long time, and it means you have to listen respectfully while people you think are lying make their case. But courts that are obligated to hear evidence from both sides are the only credible path towards justice. Israel has cooperated fully with the genocide case at the ICJ, and is now compiling its rebuttal of South Africa’s proof. Israel is entitled to present its evidence and have it considered by the judges. Amnesty, on the other hand, is accountable to no one. It can seek evidence from only whatever sources it chooses and disregard anything it dislikes.

If some individual was accused of a heinous crime, then arrested and brought to court, Amnesty would (I hope) tell whatever mob of angry, bloodthirsty citizen that might surround the courthouse that they cannot take justice into their own hands. By jumping in here and announcing their own conclusion that Israel is guilty, Amnesty is in effect joining and fueling the mob.

If Amnesty released this report now because they are afraid the ICJ may eventually decide in Israel’s favor, it’s even worse. Amnesty and other human rights organizations have been trumpeting the ICJ advisory opinion on the occupation and the interim measures it imposed in the genocide case as legitimizing their stance against Israel, saying the wonderful and impartial ICJ endorsed their view. It’s sheer hypocrisy to turn to the ICJ for validation, but then attempt to usurp its role and delegitimize it as soon as there is any fear its rulings may not be in line with what they want.

If this report is an attempt to lay out a roadmap for the ICJ to reach a guilty verdict and pressure it in that direction, that’s obviously wrong. Any judicial process is predicated on judges being able to reach an independent decision based on the evidence they are presented without influence or intimidation from outside sources

Amnesty is entitled to point out what it sees as humanitarian violations by Israel and to express its views on the conflict. But this report is yet another example of unaccountable, unelected human rights NGOs trampling on rights in their zest to fight for a popular cause. It hurts Israel, and it also undermines the entire human rights movement in the process. Amnesty should be ashamed.

Shlomo Levin is the author of the Human Rights Haggadah, and he writes about legal developments related to human rights issues of interest to the Jewish community. You can find him at https://hrhaggadah.com/.

The post Why Does Amnesty International Have Relevance for Views on Israel? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Iran and Terrorism: Empty Gestures or Genuine Change?

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi speaks during a meeting with foreign ambassadors in Tehran, Iran, July 12, 2025. Photo: Hamid Forootan/Iranian Foreign Ministry/WANA (West Asia News Agency)/Handout via REUTERS

In a world grappling with persistent threats of terrorism and financial crimes, the international community must not be swayed by superficial gestures.

While Tehran’s recent ratification of the Palermo Convention against transnational organized crime may seem like a step in the right direction on the surface, it is likely a calculated move designed to distract from the regime’s continued and unwavering support for global terrorism.

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) reportedly plans to meet with Tehran’s bureaucrats to review whether the Islamic Republic of Iran has complied with its action plan to be removed from its blacklist.

However, the global financial watchdog must resist the temptation to remove Tehran from the list, because the Islamic Republic fundamentally remains committed to funding terrorism and engaging in illicit financing. To remove Tehran would be to ignore a mountain of evidence that supports this unequivocal fact.

In fact, removing Iran would endanger the integrity of the international financial system.

For years, the Islamic Republic has been a leading state sponsor of terrorism. No single treaty that Iran may ratify can disguise this fact.

The regime’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has a long and bloody history of plotting assassinations on American soil and overseas, targeting high-profile figures like President Donald Trump, journalists, dissidents, and ordinary citizens. This is not the conduct of a state genuinely committed to combating organized crime. It is the action of a rogue regime that uses terror as a primary tool of its foreign policy.

The recent move by Iran’s Expediency Discernment Council to ratify the United Nations’ Palermo Convention — after years of refusing to do so — is a classic example of Tehran’s diplomatic gamesmanship.

Tehran understands its presence on the FATF blacklist has crippled its economy, It is desperate for a reprieve. However, the regime has refused to ratify the most crucial of the FATF-required treaties: the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (CFT).

By refusing to do so, Tehran is signaling its intention to continue funding terrorist proxies including Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. Nor has Iran abandoned the facilitation network it has provided to Al-Qaeda. While Tehran may one day feel compelled to ratify the CFT for economic reasons, removing it from the blacklist should take place only if commensurate conduct changes on the terrorism front — and that change is sustained.

The international community has already witnessed the devastating consequences of Iran’s terror financing. The Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, was inspired, funded, and enabled by Tehran. The regime’s support for the Houthis in Yemen has destabilized the region and disrupted global trade, costing the United States and its allies billions of dollars. Tehran’s backing of Hezbollah in Lebanon threatens the security of Israel and the stability of the entire Middle East. Iran should not be welcomed back into the global financial fold until it changes its conduct, not merely purports to agree to an item on a technical checklist.

The FATF has a clear mandate: to protect the global financial system from money laundering and terrorist financing. To fulfill this mandate, it must hold Iran to the same standard as every other nation. This means insisting on full and unconditional compliance with all FATF requirements, including the ratification of the CFT and demonstrable adherence to its principles. There can be no exceptions, carve-outs, or special treatment for a regime that has blatantly and repeatedly violated international law and circumvented sanctions.

Tehran’s diplomatic overtures are nothing but a smokescreen. As long as the regime continues to fund terrorism, plot assassinations, and destabilize the Middle East, it must remain on the FATF blacklist. The security of the United States and its allies, and the integrity of the global financial system, depend on it. The message to Tehran must be clear: words are not enough. Its actions and malign conduct must change.

Saeed Ghasseminejad is a senior advisor at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD). Toby Dershowitz is managing director at FDD Action, FDD is a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan research institute focused on national security and foreign policy. FDD Action is a non-partisan 501(c)(4) organization established to advocate for effective policies to promote US national security and defend free nations. Follow the authors on X @SGhasseminejad and @tobydersh.

Continue Reading

RSS

From Sacred to Strategic: Hamas Turns Civilian Infrastructure Into Targets

Palestinian Hamas terrorists stand guard on the day of the handover of hostages held in Gaza since the deadly Oct. 7, 2023, attack, as part of a ceasefire and a hostages-prisoners swap deal between Hamas and Israel, in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip, Feb. 22, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Hatem Khaled

Two weeks ago, the IDF revealed a chilling incident: Hamas operatives posed as World Central Kitchen aid workers, wearing yellow vests and using WCK-branded vehicles. WCK swiftly confirmed that the imposters had no affiliation — that this was terrorism hiding in humanitarian garb.

Then, earlier this week, Israel struck Nasser Hospital in Southern Gaza — not randomly, cruelly or without reason, but because Hamas was using the hospital to operate surveillance cameras to track IDF movements.

A tragic battlefield misstep occurred when tank fire was used to disable those cameras instead of drones, killing 6 Hamas terrorists who were either operating or near the targeted cameras, but also resulting in unintended civilian casualties. This outcome was tragic — but sadly predictable. 

This is the logic of Hamas’ strategy: weaponize Gaza’s hospitals, schools, mosques, and aid centers, force civilian casualties and damage to civilian infrastructure, and then broadcast them as evidence of Israeli atrocity.

Hospitals: Protected — Until Abused

International Humanitarian Law (IHL) stands firm: during a war, hospitals may not be targetedunless they are being used for military purposes. Hamas’ use of these sites as command or surveillance posts nullifies their protection.

Mosques and Schools: Sacred — Until Militarized

Houses of worship and schools are also granted special status under IHL. But that protection dissolves once they are used for military advantage — a tactic Hamas consistently employs, turning places of worship into weapons depots and schools into hideouts.

Humanitarian Aid: Safe — Until Exploited

Under IHL, even aid workers can become legitimate targets when Hamas impersonates them. The WCK incident not only endangered genuine aid efforts, but it also weaponized the trust people place in humanitarian organizations, and eroding that trust endangers aid workers everywhere in Gaza.

This Is Calculated — Not Casual

These are not random errors — they are deliberate Hamas strategies: embed fighters and military and tactical equipment in civilian infrastructure, provoke strikes, and unleash graphic narratives. The recent hospital strike and the WCK impersonation reflect this grim choreography.

A Double Standard with Deadly Consequences

When US or UK forces faced civilian casualties in Mosul or Aleppo, the world understood the moral complexity caused by ISIS embedding itself among civilians and fighting in civilian clothes.

But when Israel confronts Hamas — whose tunnel networks under hospitals and all other civilian infrastructure in Gaza rival entire urban subway systems — the narrative is nearly monolithic: Israel is the villain.

This is the double standard defined in the IHRA working definition of antisemitism.

No Safe Haven for Gaza Civilians

Hamas’ cynical human shield strategy and its use of Gaza’s civilian infrastructure as cover is enhanced as a tactical tool by the actions of Gaza’s Arab neighbors.

In Syria and Ukraine, civilians fled across borders to safety in Jordan, Poland, Turkey.

In fact, in every war in modern history, civilians have left combat zones to go to neighboring non-hostile countries.

But after October 7, Egypt and Jordan closed their borders, citing political fears. That leaves Gaza civilians trapped — forced to rely on limited “humanitarian zones” Israel sets up — zones Hamas routinely targets and even tries to stop Gazans from entering.

The result: Israel is held to an impossible standard: avoid civilian casualties even when terrorists hide themselves and their military and tactical infrastructure next to, among, and beneath them, while Gaza’s Arab neighbors are held to no standard of refuge for their fellow Arabs whatsoever.

Casualty Figures — Propaganda Masquerading as Data

To make matters worse, most media outlets parrot casualty numbers from Hamas’ so-called “Health Ministry.”

The Gaza Health Ministry’s numbers lump together civilians, combatants, natural deaths, and even those killed by Hamas’ own misfired rockets. For years before October 7th, between 5,000 and 7,000 people in Gaza died from natural causes. Meanwhile, at least 15% to 25% of Hamas and Islamic Jihad’s rockets fall short, killing Gazans.

And Hamas routinely kills Gazans it decides are “collaborators” with Israel. All these deaths — along with the death of Hamas fighters — are aggregated in Hamas’s “death tolls” for the October 7th war it started.

Yet the narrative advanced by major media outlets and on social media paint every death as of a civilian killed by Israel. This is propaganda masquerading as data.

Conclusion: Accountability, Not Convenient Narratives

Hamas will continue to weaponize its own civilians — and civilian spaces — if excuses remain for its behavior. Only when the global dialogue refuses to blame Israel for the foreseeable results of Hamas’ human-shield warfare can moral clarity return.

The responsibility lies — with Hamas, not Israel — to stop turning Gaza’s hospitals, schools, and civilian infrastructure generally into strategic targets. Let’s call this what it is: terrorism hiding behind civilian facades. Until the world stops tolerating and even rewarding Hamas’ cynical human shield tactics, they will continue.

Micha Danzig is a current attorney, former IDF soldier & NYPD police officer. He currently writes for numerous publications on matters related to Israel, antisemitism & Jewish identity & is the immediate past President of StandWithUs in San Diego and a national board member of Herut.

Continue Reading

RSS

What Is the Future for Russian-Speaking Jews in America?

Morris Abram (left), chairman of National Conference on Soviet Jewry, with Ed Koch, former Mayor of New York City, and Natan Sharansky, former Prisoner of Conscience. Photo: Center for Jewish History via Flickr.

The Russian-speaking Jewish community (RSJ) has traveled a long road to America.

From pogroms and World Wars to Soviet repression, our families fled in search of freedom and opportunity. New immigration to the US has slowed, and today, the future of the community rests with the children of those who arrived decades ago. What will their identity look like?

To find out, the American Russian-Speaking Jews Alliance (ARSJA) surveyed RSJ parents and received over 250 responses summarized in a new report.

The findings show a community deeply committed to raising Jewish children — even if traditional religious observance is not at the center.

Although 54 percent of the respondents do not keep kosher and only 3 percent attend synagogue daily, 89 percent of parents expect their children will have a “Very strong” or “Somewhat strong” Jewish identity.

Community life seems to be more popular than ritual. More than half of those surveyed attend RSJ gatherings or Israel-related events, and 67 percent go to synagogue on the High Holidays.

Shaul Kelner, professor of Jewish Studies and Sociology at Vanderbilt University, reminded us that, “American Jews are a diverse population, and there is no one-size-fits-all approach. It’s important that organizations like ARSJA are working to identify and respond to the specific needs of the Russian-speaking Jewish community.”

The “Russian-speaking” part of the identity is more complicated.

Most parents (58 percent) want their children to speak Russian mainly to communicate with grandparents.

Grandparents (75 percent) and parents (70 percent) are the people children use Russian with most often.

Yet only 60 percent of parents believe their children will maintain a strong RSJ identity. For some, the label recalls a painful past. One respondent said that they “see [their] Russian-speaking identity as really more of being raised in the former USSR, a totalitarian regime, the type of which we hope our children will never experience.”

Still, the community is finding new expressions of identity. Judi Garrett, COO at Jewish Relief Network Ukraine, points out that RSJs have played an active role in fundraising efforts. She noted that American-born RSJs organized campaigns that raised significant support for humanitarian aid in Ukraine. Philanthropy may become one of the ways that the next generation expresses who they are.

Parents also voiced deeper concerns. When asked what they worried about most regarding their children’s Jewish identity, the most common answers were antisemitism and assimilation. These anxieties echo across the wider American Jewish community and underscore how forces outside the family shape identity.

The survey does not provide simple answers. It does, however, spark an important conversation. For RSJs in America, the challenge is not only how to preserve their heritage, but how to pass down a Jewish identity rooted in belonging, pride, and purpose.

Mariella Favel leads data analysis at ARSJA, as well as research into how various communal and national organizations are influencing civic discourse.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News