On May 5, 2010, the Palestinian NGO BADIL awarded a prize to a blatantly antisemitic cartoon, featuring a grotesque caricature of a Jewish man standing over a dead Arab child and holding a pitchfork dripping with blood.

NGO Monitor wrote to officials from DanChurchAid (DCA), a BADIL partner, asking whether they were familiar with the cartoon contest and whether DCA had funded it. Initially, DCA requested clarification on the “definition of anti-Semitism used by NGO Monitor to reach your very serious conclusions” and the “specific interpretation and analyses of the alleged anti-Semitic language.”

However, after viewing the cartoon in question, the regional DCA representative agreed that the cartoon was antisemitic, attributing “this unfortunate incident” to “a misjudgment or error on behalf of Badil management.” DCA claimed that they did not fund the Al-Awda Awards.

NGO Monitor also requested information from DanChurchAid on its funding for BADIL. Despite repeated emails and phone calls, DCA did not respond to these questions.

Correspondence:

1) Letter to DanChurchAid, re: DanChurchAid funding for BADIL’s poster competition (August 26, 2010)
2) Response from DanChurchAid, asking for specifics on the cartoon’s antisemitism (August 31, 2010)
3) NGO Monitor’s reply, including reference to the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights’ definition of antisemitism (September 1, 2010)
4) DanChurchAid’s response, acknowledging the antisemitism (September 7, 2010
5) Follow questions from NGO Monitor on funding for BADIL (September 12, 2010)
6) Re-send of the funding questions (October 3, 2010)


1) Letter to DanChurchAid, re: DanChurchAid funding for BADIL’s poster competition (August 26, 2010)

Mads Schack Lindegaard

Regional Representative – Palestine
DanChurchAid

Re: DanChurchAid funding for BADIL’s poster competition

Dear Mr. Schack Lindegaard

In October 2009, DanChurchAid partner BADIL announced its 2010 Annual Al-Awda Awards competition. This program “aim[ed] to provide a platform for the use of creative expression to promote Palestinian cultural identity and Palestinian refugee rights.”

One of the components was a caricature contest. BADIL published the submissions, some of which are antisemitic in both style and content.

As part of our ongoing research into NGO activities and funding, we would appreciate responses to the following questions:

  1. As a partner organization to BADIL, were you aware of the antisemitic posters that were produced for the Al-Awda Awards?
  2. Was DanChurchAid funding used for this contest?

Sincerely,

Karoline Henriques
Europe Desk
NGO Monitor

cc: Gerald Steinberg, President, NGO Monitor
Malene Sonderskov, Global Unit, DanChurchAid
Allan Duelund Jensen, Global Funding Unit, DanChurchAid


2) Response from DanChurchAid, asking for specifics on the cartoon’s antisemitism (August 31, 2010)

Dear Karoline Henriques,

Thanks you for your mail in which you bring up some very serious matters that should not be treated lightly. In order to give the very serious problem of anti-Semitism and its many victims the appropriate respect, we need to address the issue with more depth than you do in your mail. My suggestion is that you:

  1. Give us the definition of anti-Semitism used by NGO Monitor to reach your very serious conclusions.
  2. That you give us the specific interpretation and analyses of the alleged anti-Semitic language of the several posters you say you have identified as being anti-Semitic.
  3. That you supply us with thorough argumentation why you think that the style in so many of the posters are anti-Semitic.

I hope you understand our urge to deal with this matter as professionally as at all possible. It is of outmost importance that we understand that millions of Jews has been killed because of anti-Semitism. It is not a word one should use without thorough considerations as its victims deserve the appropriate respect of not belittling the gross human rights violations that has taken place because of anti-Semitism throughout history.

Sincerely,

Mads     


3) NGO Monitor’s reply, including reference to the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights definition of antisemitism (September 1, 2010)

Dear Mr. Mads Schack Lindegård,

Thank you for your response regarding DanChurchAid’s funding for BADIL. These are, as you point out, highly important issues whose implications are far-reaching. We therefore look forward to hearing more about the general framework for DanChurchAid’s policies in choosing partner organizations.

Concerning BADIL’s cartoons, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights definition of antisemitism is instructive. It defines antisemitism as employing “sinister stereotypes and negative character traits,” as well as the use of “the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis” (full definition below).

For instance, one caricature – which won a monetary award in BADIL’s contest – is a blatant representation of classic antisemitic tropes, including but not limited to a Jewish man, garbed in traditional Hasidic attire, with a crocked nose and side locks. He stands above a dead child and skulls, holding a pitched-fork dripping with blood.

Therefore, we await your response to our original questions:
 
1) As a partner organization to BADIL, were you aware that the Al-Awda Awards would result in the production of anti-Semitic caricatures?
 
2) Do you know how much of the DanishChurchAid funding to BADIL was used for this specific contest?

Additionally, there are other concerns regarding BADIL’s involvement in antisemitism, as defined by the EU, in particular “Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.” BADIL’s website contains the following claim:

“Forced displacement which created the refugee issue, has been yet another dimension of the Zionist project to establish the state of Israel as a racist colonial entity.” (emphasis added)

Your response to this element would also be appreciated.

Sincerely,

Karoline Henriques
Europe Desk
NGO Monitor

Working Definition of Antisemitism

The purpose of this document is to provide a practical guide for identifying incidents, collecting data, and supporting the implementation and enforcement of legislation dealing with antisemitism.

Working definition: “Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

In addition, such manifestations could also target the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.

Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:

  •  Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
  • Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
  • Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
  • Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
  • Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
  • Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.

Examples of the ways in which antisemitism manifests itself with regard to the State of Israel taking into account the overall context could include:

  • Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
  • Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
  • Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
  • Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
  • Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.

However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.

Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of antisemitic materials in some countries).

Criminal acts are antisemitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.

Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.


4) DanChurchAid’s response, acknowledging the antisemitism (September 7, 2010)

Dear Karoline,

I agree that this caricature is anti-Semitic in its style and I intend to inform Badil that this is our opinion. I also strongly encourage you to contact Badil to create a dialog with them that can prevent issues like this in the future.

With regards to your question about DCA funding I can inform you that no DCA funding went towards this competition what so ever. With regards to DCA “being aware that the Al-Awda Awards would result in the production of anti-Semitic caricatures?”   the answer is no.  

I am sure that this unfortunate incident represents a misjudgment or error on behalf of Badil management and I am convinced that it will be taken of their homepage when they are told what it represents.

Sincerely,

Mads


5) Follow questions from NGO Monitor on funding for BADIL (September 12, 2010)

Dear Mr Lindegård,

Thank for your letter regarding BADIL’s antisemitic cartoon, and for clarifying DanChurchAid’s involvement in an open and transparent manner.

We note that the antisemitic caricature has already been removed from one of its locations on BADIL’s gallery website, yet is still accessible under “Award Recipients and Jury Members.”

NGO Monitor will be publishing a report on these issues next week, and would appreciate the following information:

  1. How much money did DanChurchAid provide BADIL in 2009 and 2010?
  2.  For which projects?

Thank you for your continued attention to these important matters.

Sincerely,

Karoline Henriques
Europe Desk
NGO Monitor
 


6) Re-send of the funding questions (October 3, 2010)

Dear Mr. Lindegaard,

I wrote your office on September 12, 2010 regarding DanChurchAid’s funding for BADIL, but have not received a response.

For our forthcoming in-depth study on BADIL, to be published on Wednesday, October 6, 2010, we are again asking DanChurchAid the following questions:

  1. How much money did DanChurchAid provide BADIL in 2009 and 2010?
  2. For which projects?

Your answers, as well as additional information concerning DanChurchAid’s partnership with BADIL, are appreciated.

Thank you for your continued attention to these important matters.

Sincerely,

Karoline Henriques
Europe Desk
NGO Monitor