RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://henryjacksonsociety.org/publications/human-rights-ngos-a-crisis-of-trust-the-root-causes-and-recommended-remedies/

Non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are facing a deepening crisis of trust, with confidence in them steadily declining on a number of fronts across both developed and developing countries according to survey data. This erosion of trust threatens their ability to operate effectively. This report seeks to analyse the origins of this crisis of trust and offer targeted policy recommendations for NGOs. If implemented, these measures should help restore confidence in the sector, allowing it to carry out its vital work more effectively.  

The crisis of trust has worsened over the last few years. For instance, significant doubt surrounds the conduct and research of human rights NGOs towards Israel, particularly since the 7 October attacks. As Michael Powell tells us in his recent The Atlantic article: “organizations that explicitly valued impartiality and independence have become stridently critical of Israel.” In the same article, Powell argues that human rights organisations frequently apply double standards. He highlights how once-impartial groups, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, which originally pursued clear and principled objectives, have become increasingly biased – particularly in their approach to the Israel–Hamas war. 

This report does not aim to assess the validity of the accusations of bias against these NGOs. Instead, it argues that the mere presence and frequency of such comments contribute to a substantial erosion of trust in the NGO sector. In a conflict where the stakes are so high, and given the critical role that NGOs play in protecting human rights both in times of peace and war, it is essential to find a way to address these concerns and restore genuine confidence in the work of these organisations.  

Another factor contributing to this erosion of trust is the increasing perception of double standards. When NGOs focus on and push for the highest ethical standards for Western companies, they create a perception that they are inadvertently distorting developing markets and contributing to worsening human rights conditions on the ground – as their activities result in critical strategic assets and operations being taken over by Chinese, Russian or other similarly less scrupulous entities.  

https://amgreatness.com/2025/05/11/the-power-in-a-papal-name/

What’s in a name?

We all know that Juliet gave us this classic line, noting that (I paraphrase) even if you called a rose a hippopotamus, it would still smell as sweet as it did before you called it a river horse.

Things did not work out so well for that young Capulet, however, and the world at large has often taken a different view of names, according them an almost talismanic power.

Is that rational? You might as well ask, “Is the Pope Catholic?” which brings me to my theme.

When, to the surprise of many, the Chicago-born Robert Francis Prevost got the nod from the College of Cardinals, the white smoke had not yet dissipated before the world was atwitter about the name the first American Pope had chosen: Leo.

What did it mean? I canvassed several knowledgeable friends about our new Pope. The responses ranged from cautious optimism all the way to avid enthusiasm. “All early signs are very positive,” quoth one pal who worked in the Vatican for Pope Benedict. “I think he will be a great pope.”

Given the source, I take that as a Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.

Many respondents, and much of the general media commentary, noted Prevost’s choice of “Leo” as his papal name. Was the choice significant? Most thought it was. And if it was significant, what did it mean?

Prevost is now Pope Leo XIV. Much media commentary speculated that Prevost chose the name in homage to (or inspired by) Pope Leo XIII, whose papacy ran from 1878 until his death in 1903.

Leo XIII has become known as “the Social Pope,” the “Pope of Workers.” His famous (in Catholic circles) encyclical Rerum Novarum (1891) was both a plea to address “the misery and wretchedness pressing so unjustly on the majority of the working class” and a defense of private property. Leo rejected both socialism (“it is clear that the main tenet of socialism, community of goods, must be utterly rejected”) and the exploitation of the poor.

It is certainly possible that Prevost had Leo XIII in mind when he chose the name “Leo.” But I like to think that he might have harkened back to Leo the Great, the first Pope Leo, whose pontificate ran from AD 440 to 461.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/21585/christians-persecuted

The top 13 of the 50 nations on the World Watch List 2025 are characterized by the worst form of persecution: “extreme.” They are: 1) North Korea, 2) Somalia, 3) Yemen, 4) Libya, 5) Sudan, 6) Eritrea, 7) Nigeria, 8) Pakistan, 9) Iran, 10) Afghanistan, 11) India, 12) Saudi Arabia, and 13) Myanmar.

[M]ost of the “extreme persecution” meted out to Christians in nine of these 13 worst nations continues to come either from Islamic oppression, or occurs in nations with large Muslim populations. Significantly, this means that approximately 70% of the absolute worst (“extreme”) persecution around the globe takes place under the aegis, or in the name, of Islam.

[T]he persecution of Christians by Muslims is perennial, existential, and far transcends this or that ruler or regime. Persecution of the “other” in Islam is part of its history, doctrines and socio-political makeup — hence its tenacity and ubiquity

“More believers are killed for their faith in Nigeria than anywhere else in the world.” — World Watch List 2025.

“[R]oughly a quarter of all blasphemy accusations [in Pakistan] target Christians, who make up just 1.8 percent of the population. Blasphemy laws carry a death sentence.” — World Watch List 2025.

“In Afghanistan, leaving Islam… and conversion is punishable by death under Islamic law. This has been increasingly enforced since the Taliban took control of the country in 2021.” — World Watch List 2025.

Even in nations that would appear to be friendly or at least neutral to Christianity, such as Cuba, Mexico and Nicaragua, Christians are being abused for their faith…

In 2024, around the world, 4,476 Christians — more than 12 a day on average — were “killed for faith related reasons.” Another 4,744 Christians were arrested or illegally detained, and 7,679 churches and other Christian institutions were attacked, often destroyed.

Overall, the global persecution of Christians has reached unprecedented levels. “More than 380m Christians suffer high levels of persecution and discrimination for their faith,” according to the World Watch List 2025 (WWL) published earlier this year by the international human rights organization, Open Doors.

Every year, the WWL ranks the top 50 nations in which Christians are the most persecuted for their faith. The data is compiled by thousands of grassroots workers and external experts. The latest edition of the WWL covers October 1, 2023 to September 30, 2024.

https://amgreatness.com/2025/05/10/why-regime-change-in-iran-is-becoming-inevitable/

he Islamic Republic of Iran is facing unprecedented pressure from both within and outside its borders. Internally, economic collapse, widespread political disillusionment, and mass rejection of religious authoritarianism have profoundly weakened the regime’s legitimacy. Externally, Iran’s regional influence is diminishing as its proxies suffer military defeats and diplomatic isolation. Although the precise timing is uncertain, the convergence of these pressures makes regime change in Iran increasingly likely. For Western policymakers, this is not the time for short-term crisis management—it is the time to prepare for a democratic transition.

Internal Fault Lines
Popular Rejection of the Regime

Forty-six years after the Islamic Revolution, Iranian public sentiment has turned sharply against the ruling elite. A 2022 survey by the Group for Analyzing and Measuring Attitudes in Iran GAMAAN found that nearly 90% of Iranians do not support the Islamic Republic as a system of governance. Additionally, 73% of respondents favor the separation of religion from politics—directly opposing the regime’s theocratic foundations. Calls for secular democracy and respect for human rights transcend ideological boundaries. Opposition comes from a wide range of constituencies—women’s rights activists, students, laborers, ethnic minorities, monarchists, secular republicans, and even traditional religious groups. The 2022–2023 “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests, sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini while in morality police custody, revealed a society no longer willing to endure repression. The Islamic regime is increasingly unable to enforce its compulsory hijab law, as millions of Iranian women openly defy it. At the same time, hardline factions within the regime are pressuring authorities to crack down and strictly implement the law. Yet the regime finds itself paralyzed—unable either to grant women the freedom to choose their clothing or to return to the mass arrests and repression of earlier years. The gulf between state and society has grown irreparably wide. Reform is no longer seen as a viable option. Today, the Iranian people themselves pose the greatest threat to the regime’s survival—more so than any external actor.

Economic Collapse and Systemic Corruption