One of NRC’s principle projects in Israel, “Information, counseling, and legal assistance (ICLA),” exploits judicial frameworks to manipulate Israeli policy, bypassing democratic frameworks. NRC’s legal projects and funded mainly by Norway, the European Union (EU), and the United Kingdom (UK).
The Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) has used millions of European taxpayer funds, primarily from the UK, for a campaign that exploits the Israeli justice system and is aimed at circumventing appropriate diplomatic channels.
The British government provides millions of pounds annually, through direct and indirect funding processes, to highly politicized NGOs (non-governmental organizations) that operate in the UK, Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza.
EuroMed Rights, previously known as Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN), regularly lobbies the EU and UN and disproportionately focuses on Israel and holds it responsible for the continuation of the conflict. Reflecting this one-sided bias, EuroMed Rights members in “Israel/OPT” are all highly politicized NGOs active in the Arab-Israeli conflict.
World Vision promotes a highly politicized and biased agenda, placing sole blame for the continuation of the conflict on Israel and paying little attention to legitimate Israeli security concerns or Palestinian terrorism against Israeli civilians. In June 2016, Mohammad El-Halabi, the manager of operations for World Vision in Gaza, was arrested by Israeli authorities and was revealed to be a Hamas terrorist,
PHROC is a platform for NGO-members to lobby international forums and disseminate statements demonizing Israel.
FIDH is a Paris-based federation of 141 NGOs from 92 countries with consultative or observer status with several international bodies. In its mission statement, FIDH seeks to contribute to the respect of all the rights defined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. While claiming to be strict and impartial in its work, FIDH shows a strong anti-Israel bias by focusing disproportionate resources on condemning Israel, selectively interpreting international humanitarian law, dismissing the context of terrorism, largely ignoring Israeli victims of terror, and denying Israels right to self-defense. FIDH receives funding from international and national bodies and foundations, but it does not disclose the sources of its funding
AIDA engages in international advocacy by acting as “a collective voice of its members and representing their interests to key decision makers.” As a result, policy makers often rely on AIDA’s inaccurate and unverifiable claims without consulting a variety of sources or Israeli perspectives.
Yesh Din attempts to brand Israel as unaccountable to the rule of law as part of a wider “lawfare” strategy of pressing cases against Israeli officials in foreign courts and the ICC, in addition to petitioning the Israeli High Court of Justice to alter Israeli policy. These claims are based on oft-cited misleading statistics.
Amnesty International disproportionately singles out Israel for condemnation, focusing solely on the conflict with the Palestinians, misrepresenting the complexity of the conflict, and ignoring more severe human rights violations in the region. Amnesty distorts international law, misusing terms like “collective punishment,” “occupying power,” and “disproportionate” in its condemnations of Israel’s Gaza policy.