19 July 2005:
Funders Ignoring Deceit by Palestinian Eco-NGOs
Click
here for printer friendly version
In September 2004, NGO Monitor reported on how Palestinian
environmental NGOs were using ecological issues as a pretext
for political and ideological attacks on Israel. This update shows
that such activity has only become more pronounced. Such organizations
continue to misappropriate their funds towards political campaigns,
and repeatedly present unreliable and even false data, for example
in accusing Israel of cutting down trees in order to build the security
barrier. Yet international donors continue to support the NGOs'
"environmental" projects.
In 2004 NGO Monitor noted that out of 21 Palestinian environmental
NGOs listed by PENGON,
an online network of Palestinian Environmental NGOs, only 2 were
actually involved in environmental matters: the Wildlife
Palestine Society and the Roads
and Environmental Safety Centre - and even these two were using
the environmental platform to attack or undermine Israel. In the
last year, PENGON and its leading body, the Applied
Research Institute (ARIJ) in Bethlehem, have persisted in pursuing
a political platform, focusing resources on campaigns against the
"apartheid wall" and settlement activity.
On September 2, 2004, ARIJ published a story on its partner
website for "Monitoring Israeli Colonization Activities in the
Palestinian Territories" entitled "Ecocide
in Tequ'a Town". It claimed that the IDF had "burned considerable
areas of cropped lands and forbid Palestinian farmers to reach their
lands using dogs" and then "randomly dispensed flyers on the farmers'
lands informing of the Army's intention to clear all trees (mostly
olive) existing along the Israeli bypass roads". In fact, a visit
to the area demonstrates that no trees have been uprooted from the
area around Tekoa, despite their use as a cover for terrorists to
shoot at the road.
Similarly, ARIJ's monthly reports include tables which summarize
figures in such categories as "uprooted trees", land threatened,
land confiscated etc. In the two reports for February and March
2005, in nearly half of the 12 categories featured in each of the
tables, there is some incongruity between the text and final numbers.
For example, in the Qalqiliya area in the March report, 645 allegedly
uprooted trees are mentioned in the summary, while in the detailed
text, three separate events are described: a) 45 uprooted trees,
b) uprooted olives (with no number) and c) tens of uprooted trees…
No explanation is given as to how the figures can add up to 645.
For the Hebron district, 30 trees are mentioned concerning one event,
and "hundreds of olive trees were uprooted west of Surif town" in
a second event. In the summary table however, we find just 30 under
"uprooted trees in Hebron" (see
report). These unreliable and often false reports are funded
by the European Union and often cited by other Palestinian environmental
NGOs.
ARIJ's involvement in the Divestment
campaign is yet further evidence of its political agenda. It
joins other alleged "environmental" Palestinian NGOs such as the
"Palestinian Hydrology Group"
and the "Environmental Education Center" among many NGOs promoting
disinvestment in Israeli products (see Electonic
Intifada). The claims published by ARIJ and other groups reflect
the extreme political agendas of environmental NGOs following the
Johannesburg summit
on Sustainable Development in 2002. After the summit some very
modest criticism was heard from European and Swiss Development Cooperation
officials, but there was no reduction in their financial
support. ARIJ can even boast that in 2003, it "was able to restore
its activities to that of 2000 and resume its development…. This
is basically attributed to the fact that the Swiss Development Cooperation
granted [it] a core funding program that enabled it to proceed with
its work" (see
report). And EU
funding of ARIJ leapt considerably from less than $100,000 in
2002 to around $250,000 in 2003.
Immediately following the Johannesburg summit, the UN Environmental
Program (UNEP) published a "Desk
Study on the Environment in the Occupied Palestinian Territories"
which clearly reflected a pro-Palestinian agenda. More than 150
press releases from Palestinian NGOs, some of questionable political
and ecological content, were included in the study, forming a major
portion of the total 500 documents used. Nevertheless, the study
was condemned
by PENGON for a "continued failure on the Part of the United
Nations towards the Palestinian People". This severs as yet another
clear indication of PENGON's primary political objective.
Many other Palestinian environmental NGOs exploit ecological issues
for political attacks on Israel. With the single exception of the
cross communal project to protect migratory birds - which continues
to be operated by Israeli and Palestinian bird lovers, with minimal
outside support - all joint efforts have ceased as Palestinian NGOs
radicalize their activities to openly campaign against the security
barrier, Israeli settlements and the "occupation", often without
so much as a pretence of an environmental basis for their criticism.
(See Michael J. Zirwin's article, "Promise
and Failure: Environmental NGOs and Palestinian-Israeli Cooperation").
Furthermore, donors seem blind to the hidden agendas of the groups
they are supporting. These NGOs exploit the veil of legitimacy awarded
environmental organizations to propagate false reports and open
political campaigns against Israel. Yet the foundations that help
support these activities appear oblivious to this practice and the
damage that results.
Zev Wolfson
|
|
|