I want to thank the NGO Monitor for their generosity in supplying israelseen with the text of the meeting.
Steve Ornstein
December 2, 2009
Summary of remarks at Knesset conference:
Foreign Government Funding for NGO Political Activity in Israel
Translations, summaries, and edits by NGO Monitor*
* Direct quotes from the speakers are indicated by quotation marks. Any mistakes or omissions are the responsibility of NGO Monitor.
Prof. Gerald Steinberg – President of NGO Monitor
Prof. Steinberg gave an overview of the research on foreign funding from the EU and European governments to Israeli NGOs.
– “If the report is inaccurate or incorrect, I call on the NGOs to come forward and point out those inaccuracies – but they should not just be pointing out the things that they do not like.”
– “European governments provide large amounts of money to a number of Israeli political non-governmental organizations (NGOs) every year. As Israeli citizens, we do not know how much money is involved – it is at least tens of millions of Euros.”
– “The nature and scale of this manipulation is unprecedented in relations between democratic countries.”
– “Organizations such as Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, B’Tselem, Mossawa, the Alternative Information Center, and HaMoked – to name five– cannot claim to be rooted in Israeli civil society when they are funded by the Swedish government.”
– “Free speech is not the issue. Officials of opposition groups like Yesh Din, Breaking the Silence, and so many other examples, are and will be continue to present their views, both in Israel and outside. Our concern is the artificial amplification based on European government money that greatly amplifies the voices of these fringe groups.”
Minister Michael Eitan – Minister of Improvement of Government Service
Minister Eitan discussed the importance of full transparency in preserving democracy, so the public can make informed decisions about what policies and ideas to support. He also expressed his regret that the NGOs refused to attend the meeting, despite the best efforts to include their perspectives and provide an open platform.
– “We are not prohibiting involvement, but it has to be transparent to the public, that Israel’s interests stand at the center. This is particularly important in Israel which is in an existential struggle; democracy is important to Israel, and we want to preserve its democracy.”
– “It was crucial that organizations with different orientations participate. There was an attempt to push for this, to hear the debate and evaluate things along with those who don’t see this [conference] positively.” [NGOs] talk about open discussion and debate. I’m not convinced that their ability to come and present their position was distorted, to defend it and attack others. They had an open platform here, but chose not to come.”
MK Zeev Elkin – Chair of the Likud Parliamentary Group
MK Elkin addressed the need to pay attention to developments in the third sector, especially concerning foreign government funding. The Israeli public and the state have a right to know about this involvement. Elkin suggested that NGOs refused to attend in order to avoid transparency.
– “In modern times, the third sector has immense importance, and what happens there demands attention. The pressing of the agendas affects opinion among the Israeli public, and the standing of Israel in international affairs. It is worth looking at the influence of these groups on the Goldstone Report.”
– “The public and the state have a right to know. It is clear from [NGO Monitor and IZS’s] report that it’s possible to gather data, but there are data that are not open and do not get reviewed. Sometimes [NGO] reports were not submitted and things are obscure. The purpose of this conference is to remove the opacity (lit. ‘disperse the fog,’) and to establish a mechanism to make this happen.”
– “The groups that chose not to come demonstrate that they are not interested in transparency. It motivates [me] to work towards transparency. What is their interest in hiding? And whose agenda does that group serve?”
Minister Yuli Edelstein – Minister of Information and Diaspora
According to Minister Edelstein, freedom of expression, association, and thought are not at stake in this conference, and the proposed legislation will guarantee that Israel continues to be an open country. However, the concept of direct foreign funding is problematic, and cannot be ignored.
– “We are not talking about tax breaks that go to [private] foreign donors who give to these groups or others. [We’re not talking about] limiting bodies, including those with a clear political agenda. Every individual has a right…to advance his interests in his country or another.”
– “The phenomenon we are dealing with is direct donations from foreign governments to organizations that advance a clear agenda in Israel.”
– “Is this appropriate? There is a problem. In the past, this issue arose with new immigrants. In a 1999 [EU] protocol, there was money budgeted so that new [Russian] immigrants who didn’t understand democracy would be brought over to the ‘right side’ of the political map.”
– “I hope that the deliberations will result in legislative action, not just summaries. For this topic, legislation is an appropriate solution.”
Ambassador Alan Baker – former Israeli ambassador to Canada
Ambassador Baker introduced the first panel.
– “There is no doubt that the work of NGOs in the state and internationally is critical.”
– “The question is: where is the fine line between realizing democracy, and undermining and damaging democracy?”
– “With all the good intentions of NGOs…to what extent do they allow themselves, using foreign government funding, to promote the agenda of another country and hurt Israel’s democracy?”
MK Avraham Michaeli – Chair of the Shas Parliamentary Group
MK Michaeli noted that the decision of foreign governments to fund specific organizations does not necessarily stem from how they are perceived by the Israeli public. In fact, NGOs are given disproportionate attention in the media and in Europe, and this affects the perception of Israel.
– “If we ask the organizations to be transparent on all sides, and we establish a platform that touches on their agenda, and they don’t show up – that demonstrates a weakness in their ideology.”
– “There are people who have failed to change the political map in Israel, and therefore they go to foreign governments in an attempt to change it from the outside.”
– “The public has to decide…Israel does respect minorities. The anti-democratic approach is to say that the minority should dominate the majority view.”
Israel Harel – Head of the Institute for Zionist Strategies
Harel spoke about the way in which foreign funding erodes Israeli sovereignty, and prevents the democratically elected Israeli government from pursuing its rightful course.
– “These organizations have a built-in interest to exist. If there is an absence of financing from foreign governments, the organizations will cease to exist. So, they serve the interests of the governments. The result is the Goldstone Report. The governments will continue to support these organizations if there aren’t voices against it.”
– “There is a sense that we are always apologizing, but we have to respond to these governments and the NGOs. They understand a culture which we do not. If there will be legislation and the appropriate voices make themselves heard, this will be the beginning of reform.”
– “In the research we see that it is only proper to intervene [in the affairs of another country] directly. [But], the EU decides what happens in Israel, and the NGOs paved the path for this.”
MK Tzippy Hotovely – Likud
– “Today there is much greater awareness of the fact that policies of organizations funded by foreign money go deep into Israeli politics. We need to have legislation like they have in the US [FARA]. This issue needs to be brought to the Knesset. At present, we are allowing foreign funding to control the Israeli psyche. We’re talking aboutlarge amounts of money. We’re internally hurting ourselves. Legislation is the only way to prevent outsiders from controlling the public consciousness in Israel.”
Gershon Baskin – CEO Israel-Palestine Center for Research and Information (IPCRI)
– “I am the minority here. This discussion scares me. Not because it hurts the pockets of my organization; at present my organization is funded only by Japan. This discussion scares me because it is based on an organization and research that has appointed itself as a judge of other organizations and claims to know what is good for Israel.”
– “Organizations that criticize Israel are a blessing; Israel is proud to be a democracy. Do we want to be like Algeria and Syria?”
– “I am all for transparency. There is a true need for all organizations to be transparent.”
Marc Cogen, Professor of International Law, Ghent University, Belgium
Prof. Cogen presented the perspective of international law, which codifies state sovereignty and determines proper mechanisms for one state to address the policies of another without “interfering.” He also described legislation in other countries, dealing with foreign funding for NGOs, and some of the debate that surrounded these proposals.
– “NGOs or private associations and their political activities become problematic when another state is financing and sometimes directing the NGO.”
– “Financing of political activities in another state is prohibited by the basic principles of international law.”
– Israel is not alone: “The USA, China, Russia and Europe are actively developing laws on the regulation of NGOs.”
– “The debate concerning the Russian NGO law reveals a consensus that a legal framework for NGO activities is a necessity and many states are in the process of developing a best state practice on this issue. Case law will further refine and interpret newly adopted laws on NGO’s when we learn more about the NGO impact on domestic political events.”
– “NGOs are politically affiliated in many cases, even when their statute declares that they are independent or non-partisan.”
Professor Moshe Koppel – Bar Ilan University, Israel Policy Center
Professor Koppel helped draft the proposed law, which was circulated at the conference.
– “The goal of the law is only transparency. Why is the current law not enough? In the [current] law of non-profits there are four things missing: there are infringements (violations through third party), the period of required reporting is too late (can report monies up to two years after they have been received), the law only applies to “amutot” registered in Israel (most organizations are not registered amutot), and there is no requirement of proper disclosure.”
– “The law defines direct and indirect financial support. Even if the money is indirect, but given by direction of a political entity, the law applies. The assumption is that if there is transparency, it will be more difficult for foreign governments to give money because there will be internal opposition.”
Prof. Abraham Diskin – Hebrew University, IDC Herzliya
Prof. Diskin dismissed the possibility of restricting foreign funding, or trying to make it dependent on Israeli government approval.
– “The difficult question is defining what is “political.” In the end, only full transparency for all organizations can begin to address these problems.”
– “On the issue of transparency, we need to remove the issue of political activities. The transparency needs to also apply to organizations that are not outwardly political, because an organization can camouflage its definition.”
Dr. Jan Sokolovsky
Dr. Sokolovsky spoke about the history of the U.S. Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), and compared it with current and proposed legislation.
