Now the hard left is finally talking about torture and other undemocratic abuses in Egypt and Jordan, as well as the despotism of virtually all Arab regimes. Do you recall any campus protests against Egypt or Mubarak? Do you recall any calls for divestment and boycotts against Arab dictators? No, because there weren't any. The hard left was too busy condemning the Middle East's only democracy, Israel.
Radical leftists and campus demonstrators, by giving a pass to the worst forms of tyranny, encouraged their perpetuation. Now, finally, they are jumping on the bandwagon of condemnation, though still not with the fury that they reserve for the one nation in the Middle East that has complete free speech, gender equality, gay rights, an open and critical press, an independent judiciary and fair and open elections.
The double standard is alive and well on the hard left, and its victims include the citizens of Arab regimes who suffer under the heal of authoritarian dictators. Even more important they include victims of genocides, such as those perpetrated in Rwanda, Darfur and Cambodia--victims who did not prick the consciences of the hard left because the perpetrators were Arabs or Communists, rather than Americans or Israelis.
The same must be said for the United Nations, which rewarded Arab despots by according them places of honor on human rights bodies that devoted all of their energies to demonizing Israel. In a recent op-ed, Amnon Rubenstein, the conscious of Israel, has pointed out that the UN Human Rights Commission, to which both Egypt and Tunisia were elected, has gone out of its way to compliment both regimes. Egypt was praised for steps it has "taken in recent years as regard to human rights..." Tunisia was lauded for constructing "a legal and constitutional framework for the promotion and protection of human rights." Israel, on the other hand, was repeatedly condemned for violating the human rights not only of Palestinians, but of its own citizens as well.
Nor do I recall Bishop Tutu urging the Cape Town Opera to boycott Egypt, Tunisia or Jordan as he urged them to boycott Israel. I do recall Jimmy Carter, who has falsely accused Israel of Apartheid, embracing some of the Arab worlds worst tyrants and murderers. Many who claim the mantle of human rights ignore or even embrace the worst human rights violators and direct their wrath only against the Jewish nation.
The anti-American and anti-Israel hard left is a topsy-turvy world where the worst are declared the best and the best are condemned as the worst. This topsy-turvy view has become a staple of higher education, particularly among Middle East study programs in many colleges and universities. Among many on the hard left, where the only human rights issue of concern seems to be Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, the views of convicted terrorists Marwan Barghouti are preached as gospel.
This is what Barghouti, who is serving a life sentence for planning terror attacks against civilians, but who remains among the most popular Palestinian leaders, recently said about Israel: "The worst and most abominable enemy known to humanity and modern history." It is this skewed view of modern history that runs rampant through the hard left and that gives exculpatory immunity to Arab and Muslim tyrants.
There is only one acceptable standard of international human rights: the worst must come first. Under that universal standard, any person or organization claiming the mantle of human rights must prioritize its resources. It must list human rights violators in order of the severity of the abuses and the ability of its citizens to complain about those abuses. It must then go after the worst offenders first and foremost, leaving right-left politics out of the mix. This standard must be applied by individuals, such as Bishop Tutu, by organizations, such as the United Nations, by the media and by everyone who loves human rights. Until that standard is universally applied, despotism will continue, interrupted only occasionally by revolutions such as those taking place in Tunisia and Egypt.
The irony, of course, is that in the most repressive regimes, such as Iran, revolution is well nigh impossible. Revolution is far more likely to occur in moderately despotic regimes, such as Tunisia and Egypt, where at least some basic liberties were preserved. It is the citizens of the most despotic regimes that need the most help from human rights activists. But don't count on it because too many so-called "human rights" leaders and organizations misuse the concept of "human rights" to serve narrow political, diplomatic or ideological agendas. Unless we restore human rights to its proper role as a neutral and universal standard of human conduct, the kind of tyranny and despotism that stimulated the current protests will continue.
Alan Dershowitz's latest novel is The Trials of Zion
Yermi Brenner: Rabbis' Letter Challenging Israeli Democracy
For those who haven't seen this article in the Guardian...
This almost defies the imagination.
I agree 100% with Prof. Dershowitz. The author of the article that I've posted the link to, embodies what we are up against... as yet another flight of hateful fantasy.
I guess that would make me a really bad person, who, according to his reasoning, would be a much better person if I'd only ignore the suffering of the Palestinians.
He says here that these "leftists" encourage the worst forms of tyranny, and that we "give them a pass".
Surprisingly, his cry has found many accepting and sympathetic ears here on the Huffington Post, who seem as concerned and outraged as he is that the "leftist" dare to hold democracies like Israel and the U.S. to a higher standard than the worst despots of the world.
If you want to lower the bar of expectations of Israel and the U.S. to that of Iran, go right ahead, but I won't be joining you. I'll still be very disappointed and angry whenever I read that the U.S. is torturing people with my tax dollars. And despite what the author is implying, that doesn't mean that I don't care about the other torture victims of the world, as he does in the following quote:
"victims who did not prick the consciences of the hard left because the perpetrators were Arabs or Communists, rather than Americans or Israelis."
The only sane solution to Israel's security is the two state solution, and there is no moderate popular group promoting this in the US at this time. It can't be done by demonizing Israel, or demonizing Palestinians. Anyone who insists on doing either is simply prolonging the suffering of the group they claim to be supporting.
Which is why when the hard lefts replies to this article, they can not see nor acknowledge their hypocrisy.
On the rare occasion that the right voices objection to human rights violations, it's to score some kind of political point, and isn't done out of genuine concern for those suffering.
Against Syria?
No
The point being it's not that the right is protesting.... it is that the left will protest against the US and any ally of the US....but what is the prime motive if the slaughter of hundreds of thousands in the Sudan does not bring the left out in massive protests.
===========
According to the hard left, the wrong side won the Cold War. The hard left is a jilted fiancee left standing at the altar alone. That tends to upset one's critical thinking faculties and induce inappropriate behavior.
Will they ever get over it? Not yet.
Unless we restore human rights to its proper role as a neutral and universal standard of human conduct, the kind of tyranny and despotism that stimulated the current protests will continue.
==========
Two coherent sets of human rights are competing in the Middle East: The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, versus the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam. The issue arose in 1928 with the loss of the Caliphate and the rule of Sharia. It was complicated in 1948 with the passing of the UDHR, and further complicated in 1990 with the adoption of the CDHRI by the Organization of the Islamic Conference.
The question now is, will the next Egyptian government adopt the UDHR or not? Not--if the Muslim Brotherhood has any say in the decision.
Israel is the only country in the region rated "Free" by the non partisan Freedom House.
http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=363&year=2010
You attempt to paint Israel as Sudan, which has murdered 300,000 Sudanese, or Syria, which killed 30,000 Syrians when they opposed the government, or Saudi Arabia where women have no rights and no religion is allowed except for Islam...is laughable.
I quite clearly stated Israel's human rights treatment of OTHER PEOPLE, i.e. the Palestinians, is abysmal, not its treatment of its own citizens, even though Arab Israelis are treated as second class citizens.
what would you think about a hospital that treats sprained ankles before heart attacks?
http://timespost.wordpress.com/2011/01/24/delete-the-un-restart-a-new-and-better-one/
In my humble opinion it is the unilateral support we give ALL our so-called friends in the middle east that undermines our values and thus America it self. Despotism is that a brown thing? The good lawyer seems to have went out of his way to provide a rationalization to things done by Israel as not so bad and in the end do Israel no favor. I would think that current events point towards the necessity for Peace between Israel And the Palestinians.
But if the sheep are ever wrongfully convicted we'll call you, For the Geopolitical thing not so much.
Baaaaaaaa
1) If you are spending an inordinate amount of time defending a human rights violator on the ground that it is not the world’s worst, how can you complain about people who spend less time trying to pressure Israel to improve its conduct? At least they are on the side of protecting victims.
2) Under your patented "worst first" doctrine, doesn’t everyone get a pass? Only the world’s worst human rights violator may be subject to pressure, and everyone else gets to say, “Don’t go after me. I’m not the worst.” And, because that’s a subjective evaluation, who gets to decide who’s number 1 on the baddie list? Every country can make a legitimate claim that someone else is worse, so no one gets pressured to improve. Everyone has immunity.
3) Instead of going after those who supposedly were silent about Egypt’s human rights record because they were so busy attacking second-rate violator Israel, why don’t you attack those who affirmatively and actively encouraged Mubarak’s dictatorship, including Israel and the U.S.? Aren’t they more responsible?
Dershowitz has gone so far as to say that Bishop Tutu is one of the most evil people in the world because he singles out Israel, and does not similarly criticize Zimbabwe or China. In fact, one minute on the internet would disprove his accusation regarding Tutu's criticism of other countries, but even more importantly, his condemnation of Tutu on this ground is utterly insane.