Podcast Summary – Ask Haviv Anything
Episode 57: "When Human Rights NGOs Fail"
Host: Haviv Rettig Gur
Guests: Daniel Balson (former Amnesty International USA Advocacy Director), Danielle Haas (former Senior Editor, Human Rights Watch)
Date: November 5, 2025
Episode Overview
This episode explores the internal and public crises unfolding within major human rights NGOs—specifically Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Doctors Without Borders—particularly concerning their handling of the October 7th Hamas massacre and broader accusations of bias, partisanship, and a drift from human rights universality. Haviv Rettig Gur hosts two prominent former insiders, Daniel Balson and Danielle Haas, who offer a candid, critical examination of how and why these organizations have transformed—according to the guests—into politically motivated "businesses" that have abandoned their original mandates and methods.
Key Discussion Points & Insights
1. The Amnesty International/October 7th Controversy
- Struggle to Publish Report on Hamas Atrocities: Amnesty International delayed its report on October 7, facing internal opposition to documenting Hamas's abuses out of concern it would “justify ongoing genocide” or “divert attention” from the humanitarian situation in Gaza. ([00:05])
- Hypocrisy & Internal Pressure: Numerous internal letters pressured leadership not to publish findings unfavorable to Hamas, highlighting a new form of partisanship.
2. Transformation and Partisanship in Human Rights NGOs
Daniel Balson on Amnesty’s Drift:
- Mission Drift: Amnesty changes focus based on donors and media cycles, jumping from environmentalism (honoring Greta Thunberg) to policing, public health, and racial justice, each time chasing “what’s sexy”. ([09:48])
- Quote:
“When October 7th happened, Amnesty International became an anti-Israel organization, and I should say perhaps not became, but really accented that line of its thinking.” ([12:19])
Danielle Haas on Human Rights Watch:
- Long-Term Drift, Not Sudden: HRW's current approach wasn't a reaction to October 7th but a culmination of years of focus-shifting and ideological hardening.
- “Mirrors and Architects”: NGOs now amplify and shape public and political narratives instead of acting as impartial watchdogs.
- Activist Narrative: HRW’s research leadership on Israel-Palestine is openly BDS-aligned; advocacy strategy is about “narrative change”, not just rights documentation. ([26:07])
3. Expulsion of Amnesty’s Israel Chapter
- Punishing Dissent: The Israel chapter was shut down for refusing to adopt Amnesty’s “genocide” determination, despite being among Israel’s staunchest critics. ([15:36], [18:46])
- Daniel Haas:
- Cult-like Behavior: Describes NGOs as “civil religions” that have become dogmatic and excommunicate those who challenge orthodoxy. ([18:46])
- Quote:
“When you speak out against a religion, you are excommunicated... What’s happened, it’s become dogmatic, it’s become extreme and messianic.” ([19:30])
4. Inefficacy and Lack of Seriousness
- Loss of Purposeful Advocacy: Amnesty has alienated all Israeli policy circles, showing little interest in persuading or engaging actual stakeholders.
- Balson:
“Shaping Israeli policy is not the goal of Amnesty International… The goal is to win... support, retweets, donations… from a group of like-minded organizations and clicks.” ([23:36])
- Balson:
- Research Quality Degraded: HRW and Amnesty’s output is increasingly shallow, largely reliant on social media and echo chamber narratives.
- Editing and Methodological Failures: Even flagship reports on Israel received token editorial attention, and open cases of fabrication were ignored. [31:20–37:00]
“Reports would go through the most rigorous process, social media tweets the least... there are huge holes in methodology.” (B, [34:19])
5. Antisemitism and Selective Outrage
- Amnesty’s Double Standards:
- Board member celebrated violence against Israeli civilians—no consequences. ([41:19–45:26])
- Jewish staffers raising concerns were unsupported, while the organization took major action on racism and other forms of hate after George Floyd and #MeToo.
- Quote:
“The disdain for Jewish staff who have anything to say or any critique to make... is so overt now...” (B, [48:15])
6. Are Human Rights NGOs Irredeemable?
- NGOs are Now “Businesses”:
- Driven by donors, trends, and operational constraints (e.g., appeasing Hamas or prioritizing foreign donors over local legitimacy).
- Danielle Haas:
“They are not human rights organizations so much as they are human rights businesses… they have financial, ideological, operational considerations.” ([56:05])
- Can They Be Fixed? Mixed Sentiment.
- Haas: “Let the growth begin anew… grassroots organizations, much like they were in their day, very humble… let the growth begin anew.” (B, [53:38])
- Balson: Change is possible but only through public scrutiny, government disengagement, and new entrants focused on impartiality.
7. The Path Forward
- Transparency & Accountability:
- More public scrutiny, congressional hearings, and open media discussion needed to expose failures and create pressure for reform or new alternatives. ([53:38–56:05])
- Courage in Criticism:
- Need to distinguish critique from anti-human rights attacks by actual authoritarians.
- Hope for New Movements:
- Local, grassroots organizations are emerging (especially in Israel), focused on real rights defense rather than political theater. (A, [57:19–61:06])
- Balson: Cites US civil liberties movement seeing similar shifts, opening space for renewal.
Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments
- On Amnesty’s Internal Focus:
"The people who are behind these [campus] demonstrations... one of the most prestigious places where a young activist might be able to land is Amnesty International." (C, [08:24])
- On Narrative Control:
"We are actively interested in changing the narrative about Israel. We are going to shape the story about Israel. And this is a real feature..." (B, [26:07])
- On Shutting Down Internal Israeli Critics:
"It was absolutely retribution... getting rid of essentially a country they didn't want represented in their organization." (B, [18:46])
- On Research Quality:
“The products... are dramatically decreasing and had dramatically decreased by the time I left. ...the change was an absolute shift towards social media, towards op eds and shorter, more bitty pieces.” (B, [34:19])
- On Antisemitism & Double Standards:
"But we raised our concerns... you have a human rights organization whose board is cheering for human rights violations. This is simply unhinged..." (C, [46:26])
- On Future of Human Rights Work:
“We need human rights. Whether we need these legacy organizations to be their bearers is another question.” (B, [51:38])
Timestamps for Important Segments
- 00:05–07:01 — Introduction, background on current crises in NGOs
- 07:01–13:23 — The evolution of partisanship in Amnesty & HRW
- 13:23–19:30 — Amnesty’s expulsion of its Israel chapter and "civil religion" cultism
- 21:55–28:22 — Loss of advocacy focus, rise of narrative activism
- 31:20–38:23 — Failures in research rigor, editorial process, fabrication
- 41:19–49:17 — Antisemitism, hypocrisy, political selectivity
- 49:42–56:05 — Can the NGOs be redeemed? New grassroots models
- 56:05–62:38 — Reframing NGOs as businesses, looking to the future
- 62:38–end — Final thoughts: renewal, hope, the need for genuine rights advocacy
Conclusion
This episode provides a searing critique from two high-level former insiders of the world's most prominent human rights organizations. The consensus is that HRW, Amnesty International, and others have departed from their core missions—becoming politicized, narrative-driven actors with declining research standards and little interest in genuine advocacy or universal human rights. Both guests argue for radical transparency, more critical scrutiny, and the urgent need for new organizations anchored in local realities, universality, and real-world engagement. The episode ends on a hopeful, if cautious, note: as the failures of legacy NGOs become apparent, new movements for genuine human rights may finally be ready to grow.