[Opinion] Analysis: For the New Israel Fund, Change Must Come From Within
Aaron Kalman claims that for genuine change to happen, the New Israel Fund must start by asking tough, introspective questions.
Publications: | Reports, Books, Academic Publications, Submissions, Resource Pages |
---|---|
Other Content Types: | Press Releases, In The Media, Presentations, Posts, , Key Issues |
NGOs: | B'Tselem |
Start date: | 1 Jan 1988 |
End date: | 17 Jul 2017 |
Aaron Kalman claims that for genuine change to happen, the New Israel Fund must start by asking tough, introspective questions.
In response to the recent wave of terror, government officials, repeating claims made by highly politicized NGOs, have accused Israel of using "excessive force" when responding to attacks against Israeli civilians, criminalizing Israels right to defend itself.
NGOs with stated human rights agendas, who are generally extremely vocal regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict, have avoided condemning the recent terrorist attacks against Israeli citizens, instead focusing only on the Israeli response to such attacks.
Two Israeli NGOs, BTselem and Adalah, have been nominated to receive the annual Human Rights Tulip prize, awarded by the Dutch government. These NGOs have far larger budgets than many of the other nominees, and already receive significant donations from foreign, and specifically Dutch, sources.
As in previous years, NGO Monitor has analyzed the 2014 financial reports of the New Israel Fund, detailing grants provided to a wide variety of Israeli NGOs active in political campaigns against Israel, including BDS, lawfare and demonization.
The 2014 Annual Report of the IHL Secretariat brings to light the fundamental problems with its funding mechanism, including support for political warfare against Israel and very limited focus on alleged violations by Palestinians.
Amnesty Internationals "Gaza Platform" substitutes interactive graphics and digital technology for substantive fact-finding and credible research methodology.
Gerald Steinberg claims that the latest UNHRC report overwhelmingly relies on unreliable sources of information, including politicized NGOs and individuals who support terrorism.
The report of the Commission of Inquiry on the 2014 Gaza War extensively quotes biased and unreliable political advocacy NGOs, many of which receive funding from the Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Secretariat, a joint funding mechanism of Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland, and the Netherlands.
THE UNHRCs latest report includes a list of four experts, among whom is Dr. Mads Gilbert, a full-time propagandist from Norway who exploits medicine to promote hate.