Take Action Now

Allowing only one side to be criticized for its crimes – reinforcing the loaded western political narrative of good guys versus bad guys – is likely to fuel the war rather than resolve it.

By Jonathan Cook, Antiwar.com

Should a human rights organization apologize for publishing important evidence of war crimes and human rights abuses?

If it does apologize, what does that suggest about its commitment to dispassionately uncovering the truth about the actions of both parties to war? And equally, what message does it send to those who claim to be “distressed” by the publication of such evidence?

Irpin, Bucha, Dmitrivka. Atrocities of the russian army in the suburbs of Kyiv. Irpin. Houses of civilians destroyed by russian tanks. russia's war against Ukraine.

Those are questions Amnesty International should have pondered far more carefully than it obviously did before issuing an apology last week over its latest report on the war in Ukraine.

In that report, Amnesty accused Ukrainian forces of committing war crimes by stationing troops and artillery in or near schools, hospitals and residential buildings, thereby using civilians effectively as human shields. Such practices by Ukrainian soldiers were identified in 19 different towns and villages.

These incidents did not just theoretically endanger civilians. There is evidence, according to Amnesty, that return fire by Russian troops on these Ukrainian positions led to non-combatants being killed.

Read More
Militarism and Foreign Policy