NGO Monitor Analysis (Vol. 2 No. 6) 15 February 2004
Majority of International and Palestinian NGO's Fail to Condemn Jerusalem
Suicide Bombing
www.ngo-monitor.org/editions/v2n06/v2n06-3.htm

The major international and Palestinian NGOs were conspicuously silent
following the January 29, 2004 Jerusalem suicide bombing that murdered 11
people. Indeed, Oxfam, Miftah, HRW, and Save the Children, all of whom claim
to advocate the universal human rights, failed to even produce a passing
news item.

However, in sharp contrast to the above-mentioned NGOs, Amnesty
International "strongly" condemned the attack,
http://news.amnesty.org/mavp/news.nsf/06502be1ae72f86480256dc800405b47/01bb1ce3b5e30e8080256e2a003cc44c!OpenDocument&Highlight=0,
Israel and demanded that, "Palestinian armed groups put an immediate end to
suicide bombings and other deliberate attacks against civilians." In
addition, Amnesty noted that such "deliberate and systematic targeting of
civilians constitutes crimes against humanity."

It should be noted that Amnesty International released its condemnation of
the Jerusalem suicide bombing on the same day the attack took place - a
marked improvement over the organizations' previous response to the November
15, 2003 Istanbul Synagogue bombings, which was voiced five days after the
assault.

EMHRN, founded "to promote dialogue and respect for human rights and diverse
cultures throughout the Euro-Mediterranean region", simply recycled the
above-mentioned Amnesty press release
www.euromedrights.net/nyheder/news.html condemning the Jerusalem bombing.
EMHRN reacted similarly to the November 15, 2003 Istanbul Synagogue
bombings, when it re-posted press releases of Amnesty and HRW regarding the
attacks.
The failure of the major international and Palestinian NGOs to explicitly
condemn the latest Jerusalem suicide bombing and previous attacks against
Jewish (http://ngo-monitor.org/editions/v2n04/v2n04-3.htm) and Israeli
targets (http://ngo-monitor.org/editions/v2n01/v2n01-1.htm) both in Israel
and abroad raises serious questions about their adherence to an unbiased
human rights agenda.