A controversy has erupted around the latest report from the NGO Amnesty International. Their investigation points to the methods of the Ukrainian army. The organization accuses him in particular of endangering civilian populations. Amnesty issued “regrets”. Minimal service.
Article written by
Posted
Reading time : 1 min.
Amnesty International was satisfied with the minimum service: it is a simple press release which expresses the regrets of the NGO, embarrassed at the corners after the resignation of its representative in Ukraine and after the criticisms formulated by kyiv. Officials are not speaking out either, perhaps because Amnesty International is choosing at the same time to maintain the conclusions of its report. It’s hard to show up in front of cameras around the world when you’re torn like this.
But there is an attempt at justification behind this press release: “Amnesty International does not hold Ukrainian forces responsible for violations committed by Russian forces.” It was necessary to demine the accusations made throughout the weekend. Those who imply that Amnesty is playing Moscow’s game.
It is even one of his favorite targets as Vladimir Putin and his services totally obscure the notion of human rights. Human rights, precisely, is Amnesty’s core business, but this time, they have gone a little astray. By pointing the finger at the locations of Ukrainian soldiers – hospitals, schools, residential areas, when they are cities that they must hold and not fields – the NGO gives more importance to the criticism of the military strategy of an attacked country rather than the defense of human rights.
It is difficult, perhaps even impossible for these organizations to remain impartial, even though that is their goal. Human rights violations must be denounced regardless of the camp. But by definition, a war is brutal. Everyone crosses the line, but to varying degrees. Each side has responsibilities, but they are not equivalent. This is the error of this report, by implicating Ukraine, it unwittingly put the two adversaries on an equal footing.
The technical concern is that Amnesty International – like the other NGOs – only has access to part of the land. The one controlled by Ukrainian forces. It is not behind Russian lines controlling the actions of Wagner’s militias or separatist forces, for example. The vision of its teams is partial. She wanted to show that she was impartial. It’s wholesome, but it’s more than clunky.