Memorandum submitted by the NGO Monitor
NGO Monitor was founded to promote critical
debate and accountability of organizations that claim to encourage
universal human rights and provide humanitarian assistance in
the Arab-Israeli conflict zone. Our objective is to publish detailed
analyses and reports on the activities of the NGO community, for
the benefit of policy makers, journalists, philanthropic organizations
and the general public. NGO Monitor has over 9,000 subscribers
to its weekly reports and monthly digests, and averages over 700
daily unique visits on its website.
NGO Monitor (www.ngo-monitor.org) has compiled
this report specifically for the International Development Committee
Inquiry on Development Assistance and the Occupied Palestinian
Territories, although all the information presented is available
in different forms on the NGO Monitor website.
SUMMARY OF
NGO MONITOR'S
SUBMISSION:
Development NGOs are playing an increasingly
visible and large-scale interventionist role in complex conflicts
and humanitarian crises, such as that between Israel and the Palestinians.
Some of these NGOs, while engaged in genuine projects to enhance
civil society, use development aid to exacerbate conflict rather
than work towards an environment of non-violence and co-existence.
Such activity undermines their own goals and those of their funding
agencies, including government departments.
This report examines how funds given to two
DFID-funded organizations, Christian Aid and the Palestinian Negotiation
Support Unit (NSU), and three EU-funded NGOs, the Palestinian
Centre for Human Rights (PCHR), the East Jerusalem YMCA, and the
Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD) for development
projects that build a sustainable Palestinian society and promote
a two-state solution, has been diverted towards incitement and
radical political advocacy. Funds from the UK have been invested
in projects that do not promote the policy goals of the Quartet
and directly contradict the funding guidelines of both the UK
and the EU.
There is an urgent need to reconsider the transparency
and mechanisms of accountability between NGOs and DFID. NGOs have
the potential to respond productively to the dual humanitarian
crises; Palestinian poverty and hardship, and Israel's exposure
to terrorism. Yet this must be done in a framework that does not
tolerate misuse of funds for incitement and rejectionism.
I. NGO MONITOR
MISSION STATEMENT
1. The community of non-governmental organizations
has become extremely powerful and influential, particularly with
respect to human rights and development issues in the Arab-Israeli
conflict. Their reports, protests and lobbying activities have
a dominant impact in shaping global attitudes and terms of reference.
2. Until recently, however, these NGOs,
which receive significant financial support from generous donors,
philanthropic institutions, and government budgets, have not themselves
been subject to independent and critical analysis. NGO Monitor,
therefore, was founded to promote accountability, and advance
a vigorous discussion on the reports and activities of humanitarian
NGOs in the framework of the Arab-Israeli conflict.
3. Unlike democratically elected governments
or publicly traded companies, no systematic framework exists for
holding NGOs to rigorous standards of accountability for the statements
and reports they produce. In some situations, established NGOs
that claim to pursue "universal humanitarian goals"
enjoy immunity from detailed scrutiny or criticism. In other cases,
the assumption that their motives are moral, and politically,
as well as ideologically neutral, inhibits critical review.
4. The vast resources at the disposal of
these self-proclaimed humanitarian NGOs allows for large staffs
who produce an immense volume of reports, press releases and media
interviews, turning them into primary sources for journalists,
researchers, and government policy makers. The amplifying effect
of these public pronouncements has often framed the terms of public
discourse and strongly influences the crafting of policy. NGOs
are in a dominant position, providing the supply to meet the demand
for quick and focused information on what Prof. Irwin Cotler has
called "the new secular religion of human rights".
5. However, as NGO Monitor has documented,
established humanitarian NGOs often produce reports and launch
campaigns that stand in sharp contradiction to their own mission
statements claiming to uphold universal human rights values. They
regularly obscure or remove the context of terrorism, provide
incomplete statistics and images, and disseminate gross distortions
of the humanitarian and human rights dimension of the Arab-Israeli
conflict.
6. Following the September 2001 UN Conference
on Racism in Durban, South Africa, many humanitarian/human rights
NGOs adopted a concerted strategy to undermine Israel's legitimacy.
They adopted the "Durban Strategy", using the lexicon
of human rights to equate Israel with apartheid South Africa,
and incorporate inflammatory rhetoric into their reporting such
as the terms "apartheid," "ethnic cleansing,"
"ghettos," "Bantustans," and "racist
crimes." These NGOs have also initiated boycott, sanctions
and divestment campaigns against Israel in order to internationally
isolate it.
7. The aim of NGO Monitor is to challenge
these distortions and inflammatory rhetoric by providing information
and analysis. By doing so, NGO Monitor seeks to foster a comprehensive
and intellectually honest debate on the critical issues surrounding
the Arab-Israeli conflict.
II. INTRODUCTION
8. The frequent and large-scale intervention
by development NGOs in complex humanitarian crises, especially
those that revolve around intense ethno-national conflicts, such
as between Israel and the Palestinians, poses serious ethical
dilemmas. First, the comparatively small group of self-selected
and unaccountable NGOs engaging in humanitarian aid relief, "monitoring",
conflict resolution, advocacy and funding, has major political
ramifications. Secondly, the constant flow of public campaigns,
press mobilization and mass e-mailings has played a major role
in fashioning the contemporary discourse on human rights, with
little scrutiny of sources and wider contexts. NGO activities,
therefore, have created a reality where humanitarian activism
generates counterproductive outcomes in terms of the developmental
and policy goals it aims to achieve.
9. Many governmental bodies involved in
these issues believe that NGOs, free from electoral and profit
considerations, are unencumbered by narrow political or economic
interests and thus are in a good position to promote civil society.
10. However, NGOs are also in a position
to undermine their own goals and those of their funding agencies,
including government departments. Some of these NGOs, while engaged
in genuine projects to enhance civil society, use development
aid to exacerbate conflict rather than work towards an environment
of non-violence and co-existence.
11. We present below several representative
examples of organizations that have received substantial funding
from either the UK or the EU for the goals of alleviating poverty
and promoting civil society in the Palestinian Authority. These
organizations, however, have undertaken activities that exploit
the moral or political authority of their donors and undermine
the policy goals their funding is supposed to achieve. These examples
are by no means exclusive. We have organized this analysis around
three sections:
— The "NGO Information Chain."
— An overview of UK and EU development
assistance to Palestinians.
— Specific examples of UK- and EU-funded
NGOs that undermine the policy goals of both the UK and the EU.
III. "THE
NGO INFORMATION CHAIN"
12. International NGOs, like many news agencies,
tend to concentrate on conflict areas where information is plentiful
and readily accessible. In this "information chain"
it is important to make a distinction between international and
local NGOs. Many international NGOs are UK-based, such as Amnesty
International,[100]
Oxfam[101]
and Save the Children Fund.[102]
Although they have small on-the-ground teams, most of their information
is garnered from other sources, mainly local NGOs. The information
is then packaged on their websites, in press releases and disseminated
through reports. Examples of local NGOs in the Palestinian Authority
(PA) include Miftah,[103]
Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR),[104]
Physicians for Human Rights—Israel (PHR-I),[105]
B'tselem,[106]
Al-Haq,[107]
Adalah,[108]
and LAW.[109]
The relationship between the two is a determining factor in how
human rights issues are reported across the world.
13. Local NGOs have many advantages, especially
in terms of acquiring primary information. However, their disadvantages
include a tendency to advocate agendas that reflect only one side
of the conflict. They run the risk of losing perspective. Mary
Anderson terms this phenomenon, "mandate blinders,"[110]
manifested when NGOs gloss over the competing interests of the
Palestinian population to live normal lives and the moral right
of Israel to defend itself.
14. International NGOs often fail to acknowledge
the limitations of local NGOs and grant them inordinate influence,
assuming that a "grassroots" perspective, ipso facto
is accurate and reliable. The information may indeed be accurate,
but it can also be misleading because (as often happens in conflict
reporting) it reflects a narrow approach that ignores wider dimensions.
15. This situation is often reinforced by
self-serving information networks, such as the Palestinian NGO
Network (PNGO).[111]
Local NGOs have an interest in the UK-based NGOs picking up on
their material to increase their funding prospects. The larger
and more established NGOs readily use this material because it
is from "grassroots" sources. Even in cases where international
NGOs send in their own teams, they usually lack the necessary
language and access to work independently. Instead, they rely
on local teams to show them around and to "find" the
right people to "confirm" particular versions of events.
16. Another explanation for the close cooperation
between local and international NGOs is fear that a more neutral
political approach by international NGOs could result in alienation
of Palestinian organizations. Blacklisting would lead to a halt
to the flow of information, with implications for visibility,
power, and funding.
17. There is a high degree of interdependence
between local and international NGOs, which in the long term has
a negative impact on the free flow of human rights reporting.
Writing in the New York Times Magazine, David Rieff emphasized
the absence of democratic legitimacy in the human rights movement.
"Human rights workers sometimes talk of their movement as
an emblem of grassroots democracy. Yet it is possible to view
it as an undemocratic pressure group, accountable to no one but
its own members and donors, that wields enormous power and influence."[112]
18. Mary Anderson points out how foreign
aid workers can become unwittingly intertwined with the very forces
that drive conflicts. Many of those engaged in aid work in the
Palestinian territories include in their definition of aid blocking
the path of tanks, using their bodies to prevent house demolitions
and turning themselves into human shields. Foreign passports become
a form of shield in the belief that no soldier will attack for
fear of media and diplomatic repercussions. This has led to several
tragic incidents.[113]
19. Many international NGOs are not aware
of the full complexity of the humanitarian crisis in the Middle
East and, as Rieff observed have become pawns of their own "human
rights agendas."[114]
In many cases, therefore, NGOs become so committed to "predetermined
conclusions" that fit their agendas that "[they] refuse
to let the facts, as reported by objective sources, get in [their]
way."[115]
Undemocratic NGOs are therefore contributing to a process promoting
absolutist perspectives on events and norms of behavior with little
accountability in their own activities or methodologies.
IV. GOVERNMENT
FUNDING FOR
NGOS
20. Governmental funding, such as that from
DFID, plays a key role in supporting the activities of both local
and international NGOs. Such funding empowers organizations to
influence the course of conflict as they see fit, regardless of
whether these activities are consistent with the objectives and
policies of their donors. Unaccountable to anyone but themselves,
such NGOs effectively become additional political actors within
a state.
21. Government aid, particularly from the
EU and its constituent members, funds many highly political NGO
campaigns. While governments are very careful about financial
propriety and the need for an annual report, NGOs engaged in advocacy
are not called upon to explain and justify their agendas, tactics,
or political objectives or how their activities complement government
policies. As a result, in areas in which the NGOs and their allies
play a dominant role, as in the interaction between human rights/development
issues and international politics, there is a risk that sensitive
policy decisions are made without proper checks and balances.
22. This section provides a brief overview
of DFID and EU development aid to the Palestinians. Section V
examines five such organizations in depth and highlights the problems
created when NGOs are the recipients of large amounts of development
assistance with little oversight or public accountability. For
further information on all EU and DFID funded NGOs, see www.ngo-monitor.org.
A. AN OVERVIEW
OF UK DFID DEVELOPMENT
ASSISTANCE TO
THE PALESTINIANS
23. The Department for International Development
(DFID) distributes aid to the Palestinians in three ways: through
direct assistance via Partnership Programme Agreements (PPAs);
bilaterally to countries via Country Assistance Plans (CAPs);
and through multilateral organizations such as the EU and the
World Bank.
24. DFID has financially significant PPAs[116]
with a number of British NGOs that operate in the Middle East,
including Oxfam[117]
(£20 million[118]
since 2001), Christian Aid[119]
(£13.6 million[120]
2001-05 and £5 million pa 2006-09) and the Overseas Development
Institute (ODI)[121]
(£0.8 million[122]
since 2004). These PPAs last an average of three to five years
and "funding is unrestricted, which means that [DFID] do
not require partners to account for the expenditure in their accounts.
Neither do [they] `stipulate' how the funds are spent or allocated
by the partners in support of their strategic programmes".
25. Although these PPAs and other programs
under DFID are justified as promoting development and peace, the
activities are not consistent with such claims. For example and
as will be discussed in greater detail below, Christian Aid's
activities related to the Palestinian-Israel conflict have been
shown to be systematically political in nature, without visible
impact on humanitarian and development goals. UK government funding
for Christian Aid also filters through to radical Palestinian
and anti-Israel partner NGOs, such as LAW, Sabeel,[123]
the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR), Adalah, Physicians
for Human Rights—Israel, and the Union of Palestinian Medical
Relief Committees.[124]
In 2005 DFID agreed to a new PPA with Christian Aid worth £5
million per year for the next three years again with no restrictions
on how the money will be spent.[125]
The department has also renewed and increased its funding commitment
with Oxfam, an NGO with a history of political attacks on Israel,
and a supporter of extremist Palestinian NGOs such as Badil.[126]
26. PPAs with organizations that are active
in promoting one-sided political agendas directly contradict DFID's
goals of providing development assistance for poverty relief.
Such assistance requires an internal focus on assisting Palestinian
development rather than externally directed agendas based on demonization
of Israel. Such NGOs ignore local Palestinian causes of poverty
such as leadership corruption, and therefore further impede their
capacity for self help. This negates a key aim of DFID which is
to "reduce how much [a] country relies on overseas aid."[127]
27. Through their support of radical Palestinian
NGOs such as Sabeel, some DFID-funded NGOs are linked to divestment
campaigns and boycotts of Israel. DFID is therefore helping to
fuel attempts to isolate Israel internationally, an objective
in direct opposition to British Government policy, which "believes
that... constructive engagement with Israel is the best approach
to exert influence on it."[128]
28. DFID also funds Palestinian NGOs directly
though its "Country Assistance Plan" (CAP).[129]
The department's total funding commitment to the Palestinians
was raised from £25 million to £40 million in 2005-06,
due to "the increasing poverty existent within Palestinian
Society." This included £1,201,904 for the highly politicized
Union of Palestinian Medical Relief Committees[130]
and "a large amount to the Palestinian Negotiation Support
Unit," (see below).
29. The CAP budget also describes
£400,000 given to "small community based projects,"
which were found to include support for the radical Palestinian
Network, PNGO and Palestinian Federation Women's Action Committees,[131]
both of which promote boycott and divestment campaigns. Other
disbursements from this fund included $3,000 (£1,700) to
the Ramallah Centre for Human Rights Studies, an NGO that "aims
at spreading the culture of human rights, democracy, equality
and tolerance"[132],
but uses its platform to accuse Israel of "terrirorist [sic]
crimes,[133]
" "kill[ing] hundreds of disarmed civilians and commit[ing]
new massacres" and making children the "sacrifice for
the racial hatred.[134]
"
30. In its Country Assistance Plan for the
Palestinian Authority, the DFID states: "We will maintain
a poverty perspective in all we do, and will press the partners
we fund to specifically target the poorest Palestinians."
As the examples below will demonstrate, large amounts of this
funding are not being used to combat poverty or facilitate internal
development of Palestinian society. Instead, DFID funds are financing
UK charities' anti-Israel campaigning and are filtering through
to radical Palestinian NGOs whose primary goals are to demonize
Israel.[135]
31. The third way DFID provides development
aid to the Palestinians is through multilateral organizations
and programmes. The European Community's Development Programme
received the largest amount of DFID multilateral assistance (£898
million), followed by the World Bank (£206 million) and the
United Nations (£194 million).[136]
Total DFID contributions to the EU's development programmes in
2004-05 were £898,239,000.[137]
A further £272,250,000 was provided to EU development programmes
by other government departments. The following section outlines
EU financial assistance to Palestinian NGOs in greater detail.
B. AN OVERVIEW
OF EU FUNDING
TO PALESTINIAN
NGOS
32. In 2005, European Union (EU) external
aid totaled €10.4 billion.[138]
Of this, €7.5 billion was disbursed through the Europe Aid
Cooperation Office (AIDCO), an office of the European Commission.[139]
In 2005, the EU gave €279 million to the Palestinian Authority,[140]
making it the largest single contributor of international aid
to the Palestinians.[141]
A significant proportion of this money is channeled through NGOs,
humanitarian aid and development organizations as well as to groups
claiming to promote human rights.
33. EU funding for Palestinian NGOs must
meet certain guidelines, as specified in the National Financing
Plan 2004 for the West Bank and Gaza.[142]
This document states that the EU should support "local and
international civil society initiatives which promote peace, tolerance
and non-violence" and "ideas... for achieving the two-state
solution." It goes on to state that the program aims to promote
initiatives which entail "less politicized, more practical
activities which will promote communication and understanding."
These guidelines are breached by the EU's support of a number
of highly politicized Palestinian NGOs.
34. There are several different EU bodies
involved in disbursing development funds and the processes involved
in funding the NGOs are difficult to trace. One of the principal
EU bodies responsible for financing Israeli and Palestinian NGOs
is the European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR).
EIDHR is an important branch of AIDCO and aims to "promote
and support human rights and democracy." In 2004, EIDHR had
a budget of €125 million.[143]
The other main source of EU funding to NGOs in the region is the
Partnership for Peace Programme (PfPP). The EU Technical Assistance
Office for the West Bank and Gaza Strip states that in 2004 the
PfPP received €7.5million.[144]
35. Among others, the EU funds the following
radical Palestinian NGOs that allegedly work on promoting development
of Palestinian Civil Society but rather promote highly politicized
anti-Israel agendas that in turn exacerbates the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict: the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN),[145]
MIFTAH, PCHR, the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions
(ICHAD),[146]
the East Jerusalem YMCA,[147]
Adalah, and the Treatment and Rehabilitation Center for Victims
of Torture.[148]
V. PALESTINIAN
DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE:
UNDERMINING THE
POLICY OBJECTIVES
OF DFID AND
THE EU
36. This section examines how money given
to two DFID-funded organizations, Christian Aid and the Palestinian
Negotiation Support Unit (NSU), and three EU-funded NGOs, the
PCHR, the East Jerusalem YMCA, and ICAHD, is being spent. The
funds are ostensibly to work on development projects that build
a sustainable Palestinian society and promote a two-state solution,
but have been diverted towards incitement and political campaigning
of rejectionist positions. Such projects do not promote the goals
of the Quartet and directly contradict the funding guidelines
of both the UK and the EU. These examples are representative and
by no means exclusive.
A. CHRISTIAN
AID
37. As mentioned in section IV, Christian
Aid has received £18.6 million from DFID since 2001. Christian
Aid's stated purpose is "to expose the scandal of poverty,
to help in practical ways to root it out from the world, and to
challenge and change the systems which favour the rich and powerful
over the poor and marginalized."[149]
Christian Aid seeks "to build a global movement which can
change the course of history."[150]
In carrying out its revolutionary objectives, Christian Aid's
public campaigns often ignore the complexity and sensitivity of
the Arab-Israeli conflict and the core causes of poverty in the
Middle East, while promoting anti-Israel propaganda. Christian
Aid does perform some humanitarian projects on behalf of the Palestinian
people and has provided employment, training and assistance to
many. Its humanitarian work, however, is entirely undermined by
its highly distorted and politicized anti-Israeli activities which
directly contradict the policy goals of the DFID and the British
Government. NGO Monitor has documented[151]
Christian Aid's consistent political agenda and the extremist
activities of its partner NGOs, and provides several examples
here:
— Christian Aid regularly erases context
in order to demonize Israel's responses to terror. In October
2003, Christian Aid produced a fundraising film entitled "Peace
Under Siege" claiming to depict the "roots of Palestinian
poverty." In practice, the 20-minute documentary condemned
Israeli military operations while giving only a four-second general
introduction on suicide bombings.[152]
"Facts on the ground: The end of the two-state solution?"
places full blame on Israel for the deterioration of the Palestinian
economy while giving scant attention to the impact of Palestinian
violence, terrorism, and corruption.[153]
— Christian Aid has employed anti-Semitic
imagery in its campaigns on behalf of the Palestinians. In its
Christmas 2004 appeal "Child of Bethlehem",[154]
Christian Aid concentrated on the story of a seven-year old Palestinian
girl living in Bethlehem who was "hit in the eye by shrapnel
from a bullet fired by Israeli soldiers." Using the links
between the town of Bethlehem and Christianity during the Christmas
period, Christian Aid connected the suffering of Palestinian Christian
children with that of Jesus, who was born in Bethlehem, and to
centuries of anti-Semitism and blood libels against the Jewish
people.
— Christian Aid promotes boycott and
divestment campaigns via its partner NGOs and officials. Christian
Aid's Chair Bishop Gladwin has been extremely vocal in promoting
calls for divestment, and was a key proponent of the Church of
England Synod's vote for "morally responsible investment
(MRI)" on February 6, 2006.[155]
Gladwin's positions in Christian Aid, on the Synod and as patron
of UK friends of Sabeel seem to make him the conduit of radical
NGO pressure on the Anglican Church. Sabeel is the extremist Palestinian
NGO that is leading the international campaign for MRI, and is
also one of Christian Aid's partner NGOs. Sabeel's divestment
campaign in the US Presbyterian Church was rejected in a June
2006 vote that repealed its 2004 resolution. However, Christian
Aid's close cooperation with Sabeel has continued.
— Christian Aid supports radical Palestinian
NGOs. In addition to its patronage of Sabeel, Christian Aid also
lists the following NGO "partners" on its website:[156]
Adalah, Alternative Information Center (AIC), B'Tselem, EAPPI,
ICAHD, Ittijah, PARC, PCHR, PHR-I, Sabeel, UPMRC, YMCA East Jerusalem
and others. The relationship between these NGOs and Christian
Aid is unclear, although both the Alternative Information Center
and PCHR include Christian Aid as a donor in their financial statements.
The vast majority of these NGOs promote the Durban Strategy of
accusing Israel of "apartheid," "ethnic cleansing,"
and "crimes against humanity," while at the same time
engaging in campaigns to isolate Israel internationally. NGO Monitor
has documented in detail the radical bias and politicized approach
of a number of these NGOs.
38. Despite promises to the UK Chief Rabbi
of a new direction in its work on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,[157]
there has been little evidence of change in Christian's Aid's
approach or abuse of its charitable status to promote a radical
political agenda. While the volume of anti-Israel material going
far beyond legitimate criticism decreased in 2005, publications
continue to portray an extreme one-sided view that ignores Palestinian
corruption and terrorism, and demonizes Israel. The links between
Hamas, which took power following elections in January, and terrorism,
are largely erased, as is Hamas' commitment to the destruction
of Israel. At the same time, Christian Aid continues to cooperate
with the discredited NGO Sabeel and other groups, which promote
divestment and boycotts of Israel:
— In February 2006, Christian Aid issued
a press release regarding one of its projects in the region—a
handicraft cooperative. Its title, "We even left our key
in the door," and the first 3 of 11 paragraphs of the release
repeat Palestinian refugee claims. The Palestinian interviewed
in this report describes the 1948 Israeli army as "the occupiers,"
ignoring the historical record and rejecting the legitimacy of
the Jewish State even within pre-1967 borders.[158]
This Palestinian narrative is a central element in the continuation
of the conflict, and Christian Aid's promotion of such rhetoric
therefore contributes to the ongoing dispute.
— In May 2006, Christian Aid produced
a briefing paper for submission to the UK parliament, and a press
release opposing the EU and UK decision to freeze funding to the
Hamas-led PA. The release stated[159]
that "Christian Aid squarely accuses the Israeli government
of a policy of collective punishment against Palestinian civilians,
which is illegal under international law and grossly immoral by
any measure of decent, humane behaviour." Christian Aid made
no mention that aid was cut off because of Hamas' central role
in terror, and its refusal to accept the demands of the Quartet
to renounce violence, to recognize Israel, and to recognize Israeli-Palestinian
agreements.
— Christian Aid's June 28, 2006, news
report entitled "Gaza invasion targets civilian infrastructure",[160]
was published after the June 25 cross-border attack that killed
two Israeli soldiers and led to the kidnapping of a third. Christian
Aid condemned Israel's "military invasion and siege on a
civilian population," making no mention of terrorism (expect
in a subtitle referring to "militants") and blaming
the "humanitarian crisis" entirely on Israel. In the
report, William Bell, Christian Aid's senior policy officer responsible
for Israel and the Palestinian territories, states "the message
to the civilian population of Gaza could not be clearer—collective
punishment is part of Israel's military strategy." The term
"collective punishment" reflects demonization of Israel,
and the report made no mention of the barrage of Qassam rockets
that were terrorizing Israeli communities prior to the Hamas incursion.
— Christian Aid's publications during
the 2006 Lebanon War almost entirely focused on suffering by the
Lebanese and rarely mentioned the thousands of Katyusha attacks
launched against Israeli citizens. Its "September Worship
Package,"[161]
for instance, includes pictures showing damage in Lebanon and
Gaza from Israeli military strikes, but shows no images of the
war's impact on Israel. The September "Reflection" and
magazine article make no mention of the thousands of Hezbollah
rockets that fell on Israel or the hundreds of thousands of Israelis
displaced by the conflict.
39. The aim of Christian Aid's campaigns
and publications is to reinforce the image of Israel as the aggressor
and the Palestinians as defenseless victims, while ignoring Palestinian
terror, violence and corruption, and manipulating the language
of international law to demonize Israel.
B. PALESTINIAN
NEGOTIATIONS SUPPORT
UNIT
40. DFID's funding of the Palestinian Negotiation
Support Unit (NSU) is also highly problematic. DFID's stated mission
is to "support long-term programmes to help tackle the underlying
causes of poverty."[162]
The NSU, however, is a political framework established in 1998
to "provide highly professional legal, policy and communications
advice to the PLO Negotiations Affairs Department and Palestinian
negotiators in preparation for, and during Permanent Status negotiations
with Israel."[163]
Since the cessation of formal peace talks, the NSU has focused
its energies on advocacy activities that further the division
between the Palestinians and the Israelis: The NSU Communications
Department "aims to explain and increase support for the
Palestinian positions on permanent status issues and interim initiatives,
[and] to mobilize local and international civil society organizations
to undertake advocacy on behalf of those positions..."[164]
The NSU was instrumental in bringing the issue of the security
barrier to the International Court of Justice at The Hague and
is an integral part of Palestinian propaganda.[165]
The extreme bias and vilification of Israel on the NSU website
demonstrates that DFID funds (£1.5 million 2004-05) intended
for development projects to eradicate poverty are being spent
on spreading inflammatory rhetoric.[166]
— The NSU's "fact sheets"[167]
utilize the demonization rhetoric of the Durban strategy to present
its positions. Jewish settlements are categorically referred to
as "colonies." Rather than constructively discussing
the Israeli settlements and the Palestinian position in negotiations,
the NSU utilizes its resources to assert that these settlements
constitute "war crimes." Israeli checkpoints designed
to prevent Palestinian terror attacks are said to "highlight
Israeli Apartheid" and Palestinians are said to be "caged"
in "isolated ghettos" or "open-air prisons"
in the West Bank.
— The NSU drastically misrepresents
the history of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. For instance,
in a discussion on the status of Jerusalem, the group states that
in 1948, "Israel ignored the [UN] Partition Plan and invaded
and occupied 84% of Jerusalem."[168]
A map posted on the NSU site to reflect the division of territory
after the 1948 War is entitled "1949 Land Grab for the Jewish
State."[169]
This map demarks Israeli land after the war that was not part
of the UN Partition Plan as "Proposed Arab State Territory
Grabbed by Israel." These statements are gross revisions
of history—they ignore Arab rejection of the 1947 UN Partition
Plan and the massive military invasion that followed.
— In its section on "Frequently
Asked Questions" regarding the "Israeli Wall",
the NSU ignores Israel's security concerns in building the "separation
barrier," and instead claims, "Israel's strategy continues
to be to take as much Palestinian land as possible while militarily
encaging as many Palestinians as possible, all in an attempt to
continue Israel's colonization and theft of Palestinian territory."[170]
— In its "fact sheet" on
alleged violations of the Oslo Agreements by Israel and in discussing
Israeli military actions, the NSU makes no mention of suicide
bombers, Qassam rocket attacks, shootings, kidnappings, or other
acts of violence perpetrated by Palestinians.[171]
41. The NSU received DFID funds to advocate
a "two-state solution" based on peace and co-existence.
Instead, the NSU promotes inflammatory rhetoric meant to demonize
Israel. Such demonization is not enhancing Palestinian civil society,
nor is it preparing the Palestinians for living peaceably with
Israelis.
C. PCHR
42. This EU-funded NGO was founded in 1995
by Palestinian lawyers and human rights activists, and is now
headed by Raji Sourani. It holds Special Consultative Status with
the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) of the United Nations
and is an affiliate of the International Commission of Jurists[172]
(in May 2006 Sourani was elected to the ICJ executive),[173]
the Fe«deration Internationale des Ligues des Droits de l'Homme
(FIDH),[174]
and the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network. These forums
provide PCHR with international legitimacy and exposure and Sourani
often uses these forums to denounce Israeli policies of "torture,
annexation of Jerusalem, ethnic cleansing, assassinations, house
demolitions, and the Annexation Wall as war crimes."[175]
According to its Annual Financial Report for 2004, the most current
financial information available from the PCHR, it received nearly
two million dollars from international donors including Oxfam
Novib (Netherlands), the European Commission, International Commission
of Jurists (Sweden), Christian Aid (UK), and others.[176]
43. PCHR does devote resources on its web
site to documenting human rights abuses within the PA. A special
report "Front Line Palestine," though focused on alleged
human rights abuses committed by Israel, also documents "the
appalling human rights record of the Palestinian National Authority,"
including abuses committed against journalists and women. [177]PCHR's
website contains sections on the PLC Election January 2006, which
documents Palestinian attempts to achieve democratic rule; [178]and
Security Chaos and Misuse of Weapons, which frequently comments
on the intra-Palestinian violence. [179]Unfortunately,
PCHR has made no similar call for Palestinian armed groups to
reject violence in external disputes and to avoid harming Israeli
civilians.
44. While PCHR's considerable activities
documenting human rights abuses under the PA are commendable,
this NGO undermines the goals of the UK and the EU by ignoring
the context of terrorism and promoting the Durban Strategy. The
following examples are illustrative:
— PCHR frequently uses politically
charged language and selectively applies human rights concepts
to demonize Israel and promote a rejectionist narrative. In its
"Welcome to Gaza" fact sheet, PCHR accuses Israel of
committing "war crimes," "ethnic cleansing"
of Palestinians, and "apartheid." The fact sheet states
that Israel has a "policy of assassinating Palestinian civilians."
[180]It
describes "the massive destruction in Jenin and Nablus during
Israel's April 2002 military offensive in the West Bank"
but erases the context, the 2002 Passover bombing in Netanya.
In the fact sheet, PCHR employs legal terminology to condemn Israel,
such as: "the extensive, unlawful and wanton destruction
or expropriation of property not justified by military necessity
is a war crime under the Fourth Geneva Convention," while
discrediting all Israeli claims of military necessity.
— In a June 28, 2006 press release,
PCHR refers to the "military operation conducted by the Palestinian
resistance" in which Palestinians attacked Kerem Shalom crossing
and abducted an Israeli soldier. [181]The
press release calls on the international community to pressure
Israel to open Gaza crossings, but does not condemn the illegal
abduction, call for the soldier's release, or call for him to
be treated humanely as required by the Geneva Convention. In an
additional example of PCHR's biased perspective, a June 2006 press
release about the Gaza beach deaths of a Palestinian family relies
on controversial media footage and states that "the crime
had been perpetrated with a premeditated intent to kill."
[182](The
IDF has produced extensive evidence[183]
that it was not responsible for this incident, and the cause remains
unclear.)
— PCHR does not attempt to address
the human rights implications of Palestinian terrorism. Indeed
it frequently refers to Palestinian terrorists as "activists"[184]
or as "members of the resistance." [185]
— PCHR engages in political activity
based on the Durban strategy of delegitimizing and isolating Israel
through boycotts and sanctions. In a February 2002 statement to
the UN Human Rights Commission, PCHR called on the international
community to commit to "the imposition of comprehensive arms,
oil, economic and trade sanctions and embargoes (with the exception
of medical food and other humanitarian supplies), the downgrading
or suspension of diplomatic relations," and asked the UN
"to exclude Israel from all UN-sponsored conferences and
organizations." [186]
— PCHR participated in a May 2006 international
conference calling for "an unprecedented mobilization of
the international movement of solidarity with the Palestinian
people" through "sanctions ... to pressure the state
of Israel." [187]
D. EAST JERUSALEM
YMCA
45. In 2005, the Europe Aid Cooperation
Office (AIDCO) provided €500,000 to the East Jerusalem YMCA[188]
for its Vocational Training Program. [189]This
program provides education in various fields including construction,
plumbing, auto-mechanics and computing among others. Money is
fungible however, and AIDCO's support of this program lends legitimacy
and publicity to this extremely politicized NGO as a whole. In
addition to its educational programs, this branch of the YMCA
promotes the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Campaign against Israel[190]
and has also signed a petition calling for an academic boycott
of Israel. [191]The
East Jerusalem YMCA is also a member of the Middle East NGO umbrella
network MENGOS which publishes politicized attacks against Israel
on its website. [192]
46. Another of East Jerusalem YMCA's major
programs is its Advocacy program. [193]This
program conducts a number of campaigns including the "Free
Palestine Campaign," which aims, on an international level,
to "raise awareness among organizations and individuals concerning
the injustice and oppression to which Palestinians are subjected
..." [194]An
"explanation" of the campaign's "theological roots"
employs classic anti-Semitic imagery. The program's description
says that "Jesus was crucified with the people who were branded
as "terrorists" by the authorities of his time. The
Palestinians are currently crucified, humiliated, and denied their
human rights and dignity." [195]The
promotion of such imagery contradicts the YMCA's alleged commitment
to "universal values of human dignity, peace, and justice."
[196]
47. The Joint Advocacy Initiative (JAI)
is another program of the East Jerusalem YMCA that undertakes
political activities against Israel. [197]It
helps coordinate a weekly demonstration in the West Bank town
of Al Khader and distributes t-shirts with the message "Isolate
the Israeli Apartheid." The JAI publishes a weekly e-newsletter
and a bi-annual magazine. JAI coordinates an annual tour for international
YMCA branches called "Journey for Justice." A highly
contentious research paper was published by the JAI entitled "Palestinian
Christians in Struggle" which claims that "the decline
of this [Christian] population [in Israel and the Palestinian
Authority] is a highly political phenomenon in that the Israeli
state considers Palestinian Christians to be a threat to their
continued occupation of Palestine." There was no mention
of the extensive persecution faced by Palestinian Christians by
their Muslim counterparts. [198]
48. The East Jerusalem YMCA's vocational
training program does not override the highly negative political
messages promoted by this group's other activities, that promote
conflict, demonize Israel, and contradict the policy goals of
the EU. The EU and other funders should find other non-political
organizations that use this support strictly for development and
civil society, in a manner consistent with the EU's stated objectives.
E. ICAHD
49. Under the Partnership for Peace Programme,
the EU gave the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD)
€472,000 in 2005. [199]ICAHD
states that its goal is "to oppose and resist Israeli demolition
of Palestinian houses in the Occupied Territories" but is
an extremely politicized lobbying group whose activities extend
far beyond issues of housing.
50. ICHAD campaigns for boycott divestment
and sanctions against Israel and has consistently labeled Israel
an "apartheid" state. [200]In
a June 2004 statement, Jeff Halper, ICAHD's Director, expressed
sympathy for terrorists. He asserted that "the Palestinians'
need to resort to terrorism raises questions of fundamental fairness.
One cannot expect a people to suffer oppression forever, to abrogate
their own human rights in favor of those of others." [201]ICAHD
has also voiced its support for a one-state solution. [202]Halper
said in a paper given at the "United Nations International
Conference on Civil Society in Support of the Palestinian People"
in New York in September, 2003, that "the stage is thus set
for the next phase of the struggle for a just resolution to the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict: an international campaign for a
single state." [203]The
EU's financial support for this NGO actively undermines its own
foreign policy objectives as well as violating its NGO funding
guidelines, which mandate that EU funding must support "achieving
the two-state solution in accordance with the Road Map."
[204]
VI. CONCLUSION
51. Prime facie, the interventions of human
rights and humanitarian NGOs help establish common ground and
facilitate dialogue. However, in contrast to their apolitical
declarations, there is an increasing phenomenon of exploiting
international development assistance to serve strongly political
interests. This has generated negative outcomes and has even served
to contribute to violence.
52. Using their enormous power and influence,
NGOs are able to impose narrow perceptions and ideologies on the
international diplomatic and journalistic communities, particularly
with respect to their interpretations of international law. Instead
of the conflict resolution process that humanitarian relief NGOs
claim to be supplying, they often become parties to the disputes,
and actually exacerbate tension and violence.
53. Governments fund such NGOs due to a
mixture of lack of accountability and a "halo effect"
that human rights NGOs have managed to erect around themselves
that obscures the insidious phenomenon of the politicization of
humanitarian relief. Local NGOs influence international partners,
who in turn inform the attitudes of their donors, including government
agencies.
54. In summarizing a major conference on
the role of NGOs held by the US Institute for Peace in December
1994, Pamela Aall notes that the international community has ceded
a great deal of power and authority to NGOs in restoring civil
society and building peace during and after conflict. However,
she also warns that this power can be used to affect the course
of the conflicts themselves. As a result, "their work in
relief and development affects not only the social and economic
well-being of their target groups, but also the larger political
situation." [205]
55. As a result, there is an urgent need
to reconsider the relationship between NGOs and government in
terms of stricter funding accountability and more scrutiny in
what type of organizations receive support. In the Middle East,
NGOs have the opportunity to play a useful role responding to
the dual humanitarian crises; Palestinian poverty and hardship,
and Israel's exposure to terrorism. Until now, they have failed
on both counts, but if NGOs invested their resources in a truly
apolitical way, providing transparency and accountability, perhaps
they could have a positive impact. Until these conditions are
created, the NGO community, including governments and other sources
of funding, should acknowledge the limitations of their work,
by increasing their frame of reference to all the factors in conflict,
or be more open about their partisan agendas.
Professor Gerald Steinberg, Executive Director,
and Anne Herzberg, Director of Research/Legal Advisor, NGO Monitor
October 2006
100 See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#amnesty Back
101
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#oxfam Back
102
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#save Back
103
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#miftah Back
104
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#pchr Back
105
See http://org/archives/infofile.htm#physicians Back
106
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#Betselem Back
107
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#al-haq Back
108
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#adalah Back
109
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#law Back
110
Mary B. Anderson, "Humanitarian NGOs in Conflict Intervention",
in Managing Global Chaos, eds. Chester Crocker, Fen Hampson and
Pamela Aall, (Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace
Press, 1996) at 343-4. Back
111
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#pngo Back
112
Rieff, David "The Precarious Triumph of Human Rights",
New York Times Magazine, August 8, 1999. Back
113
One example is the tragic death of Rachel Corrie, an American
aid worker who placed herself in front of a bulldozer destroying
the house of a known suicide bomber. Back
114
Rieff, Bed for the Night, Introduction. Back
115
Allan Dershowitz, "First Word: What is Human Rights Watch
Watching?" The Jerusalem Post, August 24, 2006, available
at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=1&cid=1154525938961&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull.
See also Joshua Muravchik, "Human Rights Watch vs.
Human Rights," The Weekly Standard, September 11,
2006, Volume 011, Issue 48, available at, http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/649efeoa.asp,
for a history of how an NGO's agenda can interfere with its reporting
honestly on human rights issues. Back
116
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/aboutdfid/dfidwork/ppas/partnerprogagreements.asp Back
117
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#oxfam Back
118
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/Oxfam-ppa.pdf and http://www.dfid.gov.uk/aboutdfid/dfidwork/ppas/oxfam-ppa-
outside.asp Back
119
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htmchristai Back
120
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/ppa/christian-aid-ppa.pdf and
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/aboutdfid/dfidwork/ppas/
christianaid-ppa.asp Back
121
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/editions/v4n03/www.ODI.org.uk Back
122
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/overseasdevinstitute-ppa.pdf Back
123
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#sabeel Back
124
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#upmrc Back
125
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/aboutdfid/dfidwork/ppas/christianaid-ppa.asp Back
126
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/editions/v3n06/NGOsPromotePalestinianPositionOnRefugeesPart2.htm Back
127
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/aboutdfid Back
128
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmintdev/487/487.pdf Back
129
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/cappalestine.pdf Back
130
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#upmrc Back
131
http://www.ngo-monitor.org/editions/v4n05/DFIDUpdate.htm Back
132
http://www.rchrs.org/about_en.html Back
133
http://www.rchrs.org/press/invasion.html Back
134
http://www.rchrs.org/press/naqba.html Back
135
The Israeli group, Peace Now, is beyond the remit of NGO Monitor
as it is an openly political NGO. However DFID's considerable
support of this NGO (£214,343 between 2003 and 2007) represents
a highly contentious funding decision-Peace Now plays a clear
role in internal Israeli politics, and some of its leaders are
also party officials. This funding therefore means that the UK
is an active player in domestic Israeli politics. www.ngo-monitor.org/images/dfid_funding.pdf Back
136
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/sid2005/key-stats.pdf Back
137
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/sid2005/table-16.pdf Back
138
http://ec.europa.eu/comm/europeaid/promotion3/know/knowlist_en.htm Back
139
http://ec.europa.eu/comm/europeaid/index_en.htm Back
140
http://ec.europa.eu/comm/external_relations/gaza/intro/index.htm#2.3 Back
141
http://ec.europa.eu/comm/external_relations/mepp/index.htm Back
142
http://www.delwbg.ec.europa.eu/en/cooperatio_development/plan2004.pdf Back
143
http://ec.europa.eu/comm/europeaid/projects/eidhr/eidhr_en.htm Back
144
http://www.delwbg.ec.europa.eu/en/cooperatio_development/aid2004.htm Back
145
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile/emhrn_006.html;
http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#euro Back
146
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#icahd Back
147
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#ymca Back
148
http://www.trc-pal.org/etemplate.php?id=21 Back
149
http://www.christian-aid.org.uk/aboutca/who/value.htm Back
150
Ibid. Back
151
http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#christaid Back
152
http://www.ngo-monitor.org/editions/v2n03/v2n03-2.htm Back
153
http://www.ngo-monitor.org/editions/v3n02/ResponsetoChristianAidReport.htm Back
154
http://www.christianaid.org.uk/christmas/worship-resources/chmag.htm Back
155
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2028504,00.html Back
156
http://www.christian-aid.org.uk/world/partlinks.htm#meeca Back
157
http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/news/SacksToVet.htm Back
158
http://www.christianaid.org.uk/world/where/meeca/partners/0603iopt.htm Back
159
http://www.christianaid.org.uk/news/media/pressrel/060509p1.htm Back
160
http://www.christian-aid.org.uk/news/stories/060628s.htm Back
161
http://www.christian-aid.org.uk/worship/609middleeast/index.htm Back
162
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/aboutdfid/missionstatement.asp Back
163
http://www.nad-plo.org/inner.php?view=nav-about-us. Once DFID
funding was approved, the governments of Norway, Denmark, Sweden,
and the Netherlands also provided funding. Back
164
Ibid. Back
165
Daniel Schwammenthal, "The PLO's European Paymasters",
Wall Street Journal Europe, 2 March 2004, A12 Back
166
According to the NSU website, funding from DFID was scheduled
to end in August 2006 at which time funding renewal will be addressed. Back
167
http://www.nad-plo.org/listing.php?view=facts Back
168
http://www.nad-plo.org/inner.php?view=facts_jerusalem_f9p Back
169
http://www.nad-plo.org/maps/borders/pdf/1949.pdf Back
170
http://www.nad-plo.org/inner.php?view=facts-wall_isf Back
171
http://www.nad-plo.org/inner.php?view=nego_nego_f16p Back
172
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#jurists Back
173
http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/PressR/English/2006/news/20-2006.htm Back
174
http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile/fidh_906.html Back
175
http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/PressR/English/2006/news/20-2006.htm Back
176
http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/Reports/English/pdf_annual/pchr_fs_2004-Englisn.pdf Back
177
http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/Reports/English/pdf_spec/Palestine%20Report.pdf Back
178
http://www.pchrgaza.org/Library/election2006.htm Back
179
http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/weapon/english/weapon.htm Back
180
http://www.pchrgaza.org/facts_copy(1).htm Back
181
http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/PressR/English/2006/62-2006.htm Back
182
http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/PressR/English/2006/56-2006.htm Back
183
http://www1.idf.il/DOVER/site/mainpage.asp?clr=1&sl=EN&id=7&docid=53169 Back
184
http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/PressR/English/2006/56-2006.htm Back
185
http://www.pchrgaza.org/Interventions/Security%20th%20Wall.pdf Back
186
http://domino.un.org/unispal.NSF/2ee9468747556b2d85256cf60060d2a6/cef82f78e9157ab985256b89006c046a!OpenDocument Back
187
http://www.urgencepalestine.ch/Activites/conference2006_en.html Back
188
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#ymca Back
189
Document provided to NGO Monitor by the EC Technical Assistance
Office for the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Back
190
http://www.jai-pal.org/content.php?page=173 Back
191
http://www.al-awda.org/academicboycott.html Back
192
See http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile.htm#mengos Back
193
http://www.ej-ymca.org/site/Display-Cat.cfm?CatId=16&Main=2 Back
194
http://www.ej-ymca.org/site/Display-Sub.cfm?SubID=7 Back
195
http://www.ej-ymca.org/site/Display-Sub.cfm?SubID=7£TheologicalRoots Back
196
http://www.ej-ymca.org/site/Display-Cat.cfm?CatId=1&main=1 Back
197
http://www.jai-pal.org/content.php?page=173 Back
198
See Justice Reid Weiner, Human Rights of Christians in Palestinian
Society, Jerusalem Centre for Public Affairs, 2005, www.jcpa.org/text/Christian-Persecution-Weiner.pdf Back
199
http://www.eu-del.org.il/english/Award%20notification%20for%20website.doc Back
200
http://www.ngo-monitor.org/editions/v3n07/EUFundingforICAHDPromotingAntiIsraelAgenda.htm Back
201
Ibid. Back
202
http://www.icahd.org/eng/articles.asp?menu=6&submenu=2&article=132 Back
203
http://www.mediaisland.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=57&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0 Back
204
http://www.delwbg.ec.europa.eu/en/cooperatio_development/plan2004.pdf Back
205
Pamela Aall, "Nongovernmental Organizations and Peacemaking,"
in Managing Global Chaos, eds. Chester Crocker, Fen Hampson
and Pamela Aall, (Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace
Press, 1996) at 436. Back
| 
