[8]" Other critics agree that the campaign "encourages the taking of slaves" and "reduces the incentive for owners to set them free without payment" (The New York Times),[9] or "undercuts" the "battle against slavery" (Richard Miniter for The Atlantic).

[10] CSI responded to UNICEF's 1999 critique by claiming that it never brought American dollars into the warzone, and redeemed slaves only with Sudanese pounds to decrease the potential for fueling the arms trade.

[6] In 1999, at the request of the Government of Sudan, the United Nations revoked CSI's status as a consultative NGO after it allowed the southern Sudanese leader John Garang to represent it before the Commission on Human Rights.

[12] In response to the Darfur genocide, CSI helped to launch the "Sudan Campaign" in the summer of 2004, along with Freedom House, the Institute for Religion and Democracy, and number of left-wing activists.

[13] In 2008, journalist Charles Sennott wrote that CSI was "overreacting to events in the Middle East" in its campaign to save Iraqi Christians.