English|עברית|Français
RSS research
RSS News
contact

NGO INDEX

 

 

BDS IN THE PEWS

 

 

 

NGO Monitor Reports


World Jewish Conference issues 'Resolution on 2009 Durban Review Conference'



The document calls Durban 2001 conference "visceral anti-Semitic and anti-Israel charade"; lauds Canadian government's "bold action calling the world’s attention to the corrupted Durban Review Conference process"; "calls upon Jewish communities and organizations across the world to submit documentation to the Durban Review process" as part of ongoing effort to uphold universal standards of human rights.

Ford Foundation: 2007 Review of Funding for Political NGOs active in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict



Ford-funded NGOs led the campaign against Israel at the UN World Conference Against Racism, at Durban in 2001. Although Ford´s 2007 database of direct grants does not include NGOs which exploit human rights rhetoric as part of the Durban strategy of demonizing Israel, NGO Monitor’s research shows that many of these NGOs including PCHR, Miftah and PHRO continued to receive Ford Foundation support in 2007. These findings raise serious questions of Ford´s transparency and its commitment to its own post-Durban guidelines. There is also a real possibility that Ford-funded NGOs will again lead the demonization of Israel at the 2009 follow-up conference to Durban.

NGO campaigns on Israel's Gaza policy



In January, Israel reduced fuel supplies to Gaza following rocket barrages. While the Israeli measures were limited, and designed to force an end to the attacks without resorting to a full scale military operation, the Hamas leadership sought to create an image of widespread suffering and “collective punishment”. In parallel, supporters are again pressing efforts on a UN resolution to condemn Israel. As in the past, a number of NGOs have joined in this campaign, including Amnesty International, Oxfam, World Vision, and B"tselem. These NGO statements and press releases use politicized rhetoric such as “collective punishment” and "war crimes" in selective and one-sided condemnations.

Christian Peacemaker Teams: Anti-Israel campaigning under the guise of ´peacemaking´



CPT states that it "places violence-reduction teams in crisis situations and militarized areas around the world at the invitation of local peace and human rights workers." In contrast, CPT partners with ISM, ICAHD, Sabeel and others in promoting the Durban Strategy of boycotts, divestment, and identification of Israel as the new apartheid South Africa. Its speaker´s bureau promotes its highly one-sided and politicized approach to the conflict, which ignores Palestinian terrorism in order to demonize Israeli actions and delegitmize its right to self defense.

Israeli Arab leaders condemn Ittajah-led boycott of visiting Jewish leaders



Ittijah—a radical Palestinian NGO which played a prominent role at Durban 2001, and organized a October 2007 conference to further the anti-Israel boycott campaign—"asked Arab officials to cancel planned meetings with the group because Diaspora Jewry advocates the idea of Israel as a Jewish state," according to Ha'aretz. (Ittijah has received funding and support from the Ford Foundation, the EU, the New Israel Fund and Christian Aid; it is also part of the Palestinian Non-Governmental Organizations Network - PNGO.)

NGO Bias in pre-Annapolis Political Statements on Gaza



A number of influential international NGOs claiming human rights and humanitarian objectives have published highly political statements in advance of the Annapolis peace summit (November 27). Most repeat one-sided condemnations of Israeli policy in response to attacks from Hamas-controlled Gaza, including accusations of "collective punishment" and blame for a "humanitarian crisis". Following the pattern of the past decade and the 2001 Durban strategy of demonization, these NGO statements largely ignore systematic Palestinian violations of human rights, and use pseudo-legal language to deny Israelis the right to self-defense against terror. As a result, these publications lack credibility.

NGO Monitor submission to the Winograd Commission



The Winograd Commission (officially "הוועדה לבדיקת ארועי המערכה בלבנון 2006") was appointed by the Israeli government to investigate and draw lessons from the 2006 Second Lebanon War. NGO Monitor´s submission analyses the reporting of human rights NGOs during the conflict, and discusses these groups´ exploitation of human rights rhetoric and international law to promote a politicized anti-Israel agenda. Among other recommendations, we suggest that the Committee independently verify all NGO claims before considering them as evidence of human rights violations.

NGO Monitor Annual Report 2006



NGO Monitor´s publications and activities had a major impact on increasing NGO accountability in 2006.

Our research and analyses stimulated debate from government officials, diplomats and academia, to the written and recorded media and blogosphere.

This annual report is a summary of the wide range of research and reporting that we accomplished in 2006. The first section highlights key developments within the major NGOs, while the second looks at themes and events which involved significant NGO activity during the year.

Machsom Watch: Political Agenda in the Name of Human Rights



The Israel-based Machsom Watch monitors and disseminates reports on Israeli soldiers at checkpoints, with the ultimate aim of “ending the occupation.” Machsom Watch publications regularly omit the context of terror and employ human rights terminology, “apartheid” rhetoric and emotive and politically charged language that contribute to the demonization of Israel. In many cases, their allegations are either inaccurate or unverifiable. Machsom Watch is funded by private donors, the New Israel Fund and the EU.

NGO Monitor dialogue with Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES)



In July 2007, NGO Monitor published a detailed report on the Friedrich-Ebert- Stiftung’s (FES) activities related to the Arab-Israeli conflict. The report concluded that, while many of FES´s activities are consistent with its stated mandate to “work towards contributing to the attainment of a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians”, other projects involve funding or partnering with politicized NGOs which focus their activities on ideological attacks against Israel, rather than on peace, good governance and development.



 First   «  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  »   Last 
Receive Updates!
follow us on twitter
friend us on facebook
At NGO Monitor
in $US
Internships
European Parliament
NGO Monitor History

 

Copyright 2014 The Amuta for NGO Responsibility - R.A. 58-0465508. All rights reserved.