HRW's bias in report on Sudanese and Eriteans in Israel

I have not been closely following the problems of illegal African migrants to Israel. But the very first paragraph of HRW's press release touting a new report slamming Israel's treatment of them shows bias:

Israeli authorities have unlawfully coerced almost 7,000 Eritrean and Sudanese nationals into returning to their home countries where they risk serious abuse, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. Some returning Sudanese have faced torture, arbitrary detention, and treason charges in Sudan for setting foot in Israel, while returning Eritreans also face a serious risk of abuse.

Sudan and Israel are enemies. HRW expects Israel to roll out the welcome mat for thousands of members of enemy states.

But when Israel pays them to return to their home country, HRW blames Israel for putting them in danger because Sudan treats them as if they came from an enemy country.

In the entire Human Rights Watch site, while there is plenty of criticism of Sudan's human rights abuses, not one word is said about how Sudan tortures people who sought refuge in Israel.

Why is HRW more concerned over Israel's paying people $1500 to return to their homeland than they are over the torture that they may receive merely for having set foot in Israel?

By the bizarre logic of HRW, once anyone enters Israel from a country that considers it an enemy, Israel must give them asylum because the very fact that they illegally entered Israel puts them in danger back home. The home country has no responsibility to end the torture itself, judging from HRW's website's lack of condemnation of the practice.

If this is the bias in the very first paragraph of the press release, one can only imagine how absurd the entire report is.

Just for a little perspective, this report about how terribly Israel treats African migrants is 83 pages long. The last two HRW reports on the Sudan, detailing how government murdered people and raped women, are both less than 50 pages long.