IвЂ™ve been doing some of this kind of reflection myself.

This kind of critical self-reflection makes sense even if one believes, as I do, that American human rights organizations were extraordinarily fortunate to have the leaders they did, and that these organizations did a lot of work over the past two decades that was principled, tactically savvy, and effective. But askingвЂ“ individually, organizationally, and as a human rights community вЂ“ what we might have done differently, and what we got wrong, might help us understand how we need to change, and how we can be more effective in the future. This kind of institutional introspection might be difficult for a number of reasons. This is exactly what human rights organizations should do, of course.Д«ut this moment also provides an opportunity to look inward вЂ“ a chance for human rights organizations to reassess the decisions they made, and the work they did, over the past two decades. TheyвЂ™ll ask once again whether these policies serve (or served) our interests, and whether these policies are (or were) consistent with our law and values. human rights organizations will draw attention to the human and democratic costs of some of the U.S. In conversations over the next days and weeks, U.S. With the 20th anniversary of the September 2001 attacks approaching, and images of the United StatesвЂ™ withdrawal from Afghanistan dominating the news, many Americans are reflecting on these past two decades вЂ“В on the 9/11 attacks themselves and their thousands of victims on the ways in which our government responded to the attacks, and on the many lives affected or cut short by those responses and on the disfiguration of our communities, society, and world by years of terrorism, counterterrorism, and war.

How to get war of rights