INTRODUCTION
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL REPORT 1991
2 Security Council in September 1988 for urgent action and publicized gruesome evidence of the atrocities. However, the world's governments and media took only token interest, and none of the UN bodies took action.
In early 1989 Amnesty International published harrowing accounts of the tor- ture and killing of children in Iraq. In early 1990 the organization again pressed the UN Commission on Human Rights to take action on the grave human rights situation in the country. The Commission voted not to act on a draft resolution on Iraq. It took the same decision concerning a resolution on China, thus avoid- ing action on the two countries which particularly cried out for international
concern.
The response to Amnesty International's information on Iraq changed dramat- ically on 2 August 1990, the day Iraq invaded Kuwait. Suddenly, the telephones at the organization's International Secretariat in London were busy with inquiries about Iraq's human rights record. Pictures of the victims of chemical weapons appeared widely on television. Exiled Kurds, who had battled for so long to have their stories heard, were invited to speak to the media. Amnesty International's own reporting of the abuses perpetrated in Kuwait following the Iraqi invasion made front pages across the world and was cited by heads of government. The UN Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities finally adopted a resolution on Iraq when it met in August, and in December the General Assembly expressed grave concern about Iraqi abuses in occupied Kuwait.
Yet at the same time, lengthy Amnesty International reports on grave human rights violations in countries such as Chad, Egypt, El Salvador, Iran, India, Mauritania, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Sudan and Turkey were fortunate to be given reasonable space in the media, let alone to be taken up at a high level by governments.
The governments of the world stand in danger of sabotaging the hope of a new era for human rights a hope for which millions of ordinary people are strug- gling, often risking their lives or freedom. Some governments are sabotaging it by the violations they commit directly; others by the selectivity with which they exert their influence. Even those governments which are committed to protecting the rights of their own citizens have other interests to pursue in their foreign relations, and these frequently conflict with their obligation to defend human rights worldwide. Sometimes, human rights concerns become the short-term beneficiary of this self-interest; more often they become the casualty of political expediency.
It is for this reason that the existence of a worldwide human rights movement, independent of the political and economic interests of nation states, remains so necessary. The foremost contribution to this movement is made by those men and women who struggle to defend human rights at the local and national level in countries where they are violated daily. Without their courage, persistence and resilience, Amnesty International and other international organizations would often know little about the abuses: their struggle requires the strongest possible support across national frontiers. Where no open stand for human rights
MASTER KRAASA