BDS IN THE PEWS
|NGO Monitor’s Submission to the 2009 Durban Conference Preparatory Meeting|
As NGO Monitor has reported, the UN will be convening a 2009 follow-up to the 2001 Durban Conference. The Preparatory Committee for the 2009 conference is holding its organizational review session from August 27-31, 2007, in Geneva. The meetings will be chaired by Libya and other members of the committee include Iran, Cuba, Russia, and South Africa. A number of international and Palestinian NGOs are also expected to participate. Many radical Palestinian NGOs such as PNGO and LAW played an active role in the preparatory meetings in Tehran leading up to the 2001 Durban Conference and were largely responsible for shaping the anti-Israel and antisemitic agenda of the NGO Forum at Durban. In advance of the session, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has invited NGOs to contribute “reviews” and “written recommendations”. To that end, NGO Monitor has prepared a submission detailing the role of NGOs at the 2001 Durban Conference, the adoption and subsequent promotion of the “Durban Strategy” in NGO campaigning, and offering recommendations to prevent a repetition of these events in 2009.
Ireland: Government Funding for Anti-Israel NGOs
Irish Aid is administered through the Development Cooperation Directorate, a division of the Department of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Ireland. While its declared objectives are to promote “peace and justice” through a “commitment to human rights and fairness in international relations”, Irish Aid funds highly biased and conflict-producing NGOs such as Trocaire, Al Haq, PCHR, War on Want, World Vision, ICAHD, PARC, and Christian Aid. These and other NGOs are engaged in intense political advocacy campaigns directed against Israel, including promotion of boycotts and the rhetoric of demonization. The following NGO Monitor report on Irish Aid continues our series of analyses which have included the EU, UK, Sweden, and others.
Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES) Funding for anti-Israel NGOs—(GERMANY)
The Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES), funded by the German government, works with many NGOs in the region, some of which are highly politicized and focus their activities on ideological attacks against Israel, rather than on peace, good governance and development. FES partners include the Palestinian Diaspora and Refugee Center (SHAML), Gisha, Center on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE), and HDIP. The activities of some of these groups include taking part anti-Israel boycotts, demonizing Israel as an apartheid state, promoting Palestinian claims to a "Right of Return," etc. In February 2007, an FES a research report was a one-sided condemnation of Israel´s anti-terrorism activities. In addition, FES funded the 2004 Beirut International Conference on The Islamic World and Europe, jointly organized with Hezbollah´s "Research Department". The support of this German organization for NGOs that deny Israel´s right to self defense and embrace anti-Israel propaganda is particularly disturbing.
Center for Constitutional Rights: Serial Abuse of International Law
The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) claims to be a non-profit legal and educational organization which uses litigation “to advance the law in a positive direction and “strengthen the broader movement for constitutional and human rights.” In the past, CCR has been active in advancing civil rights in the United States, but its activities have become more radicalized. This organization contributes to the demonization of Israel and exploitation of international law primarily through its lawsuits against Israeli officials for alleged “war crimes, extrajudicial killing, crimes against humanity, and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” In this process, CCR consistently disregards the context of terror, denies Israel’s right to self-defense, and accuses it of deliberately targeting civilians.
French Government Funding of Political NGOs
The French government provides local and international NGOs with substantial financial support, in addition to its support for the Palestinian Authority. Many of these NGOs, which claim to promote human rights, democracy, and development are in reality engaged in intense political advocacy campaigns directed against Israel, in contravention of French governmental funding guidelines. This report provides an overview of French funding mechanisms and NGO recipients in a method similar to previous NGO Monitor analyses of NGO funding by the European Union, Norway, UK, and Sweden.
Report on HRW’s Activities in 2006: Political Bias Undermines Human Rights
NGO Monitor´s systematic and detailed analysis shows a significant increase in Human Rights Watch´s focus on Israel in 2006, following a decline in 2005, and returning to the disproportionate agenda and lack of credibility characteristic of the 2000-2004 period. HRW publications dealing with Israel used unreliable and unverifiable "eyewitness" accounts, rather than photographic, documentary, or other evidence. These core deficiencies were particularly evident in its reporting on the July-August conflict with Hezbollah in Lebanon. Similarly, HRW continues to use the language of demonization with respect to Israel, compared to publications on other Middle East countries. The evidence in this report demonstrates that despite HRW’s recognition "that international standards of human rights apply to all people equally," this powerful NGO continues to promote an anti-Israel political agenda.
“Human Rights First”: Without political bias
Human Rights First (HRF), based in New York and Washington, D.C., serves as an example of a human rights NGO which generally provides proportionate analysis and advocacy on the Middle East. In contrast to politicized groups such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, HRF presents a measured appraisal of human rights without erasing context and while preserving the core principles of universality and single standards. And although HRF officials, participated in NGO Forum of the 2001 Durban conference, Michael Posner later denounced the racism and antisemitism that marred the Durban meeting.
Double Standards: HRW/Amnesty/Christian Aid Statements on the Conflict between Fatah-al-Islam and the Lebanese Army
(Updated June 13, 2007) NGOs have largely remained silent regarding the intense fighting between the Lebanese Army and the Palestinian terror faction Fatah al-Islam in the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp in Northern Lebanon. This silence stands in sharp contrast to the frequent condemnation of Israeli anti-terror operations, such as in Jenin during the IDF´s Operation Defensive Shield in 2002. This report will examine the responses of Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Christian Aid (UK) to the fighting in Northern Lebanon and compare these with statements regarding Israel in the case of Jenin.
"EU-funded NGOs lead anti-Israel events on anniversary of 1967 war"
Many politicized and EU-funded NGOs that contribute to the demonization of Israel are holding activities and publishing reports coinciding with the fortieth anniversary of the 1967 War. These activities portray a one-sided view of events, repeating the Palestinian narrative and providing a distorted history of the war. These events are further exempleries of biased political agendas that are inconsistent with promoting universal human rights, and highlight the danger of government funding for these NGOs.
Amnesty International Report for 2006
Powerful NGOs such as Amnesty International have major political impacts, and often promote narrow agendas that are inconsistent with universal human rights. As part of NGO Monitor´s continuing assessment of this bias, we have systematically analyzed the relative emphasis on Israel in comparison to other countries in the Middle East in 2006. This research clearly demonstrates that in 2006, Amnesty International focused disproportionately on condemnations of Israel and singled out Israel to a far greater extent than Iran, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Syria, Egypt, and other chronic abusers of human rights. This evidence of a clear political agenda is consistent with other studies and examples of Amnesty International´s bias and lack of credibility.
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 » Last