Watching the watchmen.

 

“Am I my brother’s keeper?” Retorted Cain after murdering Abel. The biblical creation narrative in Genesis 4:8 doesn’t explain how that first nuclear family (4-1) managed to get house-help at a time when they were the only humans on the planet.

In the King James version (KJV) the word keeper is nuanced to mean guard or watchman "For the keeper of Israel neither slumbers nor sleeps." Psalm 121:4.

That being said, Israel is obsessed with the need to keep an eye on the keepers, guards and assorted watchmen.

The Israel Defence Ministry’s decision to designate six Palestinian NGOs as arms of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) last week, triggered a fierce response with the US, the UN and the EU raising objections and questioning the validity of the move. 

Admittedly, the statement issued by the US State Department was couched in diplomatic language claiming that it had not been told in advance about the terrorist designation and that it would ask Israel to explain its reasoning.

However, on Tuesday, US spokesman Ned Price said: "We believe that respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms, and a strong independent civil society are critically important to democracy," in what was interpreted by some as a rebuke.

UN and EH representatives were far more critical of the designation.

On Monday, European Union Representative to the Palestinians Sven Kühn Von Burgsdorff visited the six Palestinian NGOs Defence Minister Benny Gantz had targeted. On Wednesday, representatives of 25 Israeli nongovernmental groups paid a solidarity visit to the Al-Haq office in Ramallah to voice their opposition to the designation.

 “Are the people employed by Palestinian NGOs human rights workers or agents of terror?” Asked Michael Starr, desk manager at the Jerusalem Post.

 

“Two divergent narratives emerged in the wake of the defence ministry’s decision. In one reality resides Gantz, the defence ministry and pro-Israel NGOs   claiming that long-ignored terrorist activity cynically cloaked in the guise of human rights has finally been unmasked.

The other narrative considers the six NGOs to be human rights organisations and considers the designation to be a draconian attack on Palestinian civil society. 

On one side, you have Professor Gerald M. Steinberg, president and founder of NGO Monitor, who says: “There’s no justification for not considering or ignoring or overlooking the terrorist connections. These are not trivial accusations, Israelis have been killed by the PFLP.

On the other side, there’s Samer Sinijlawi, chairman of the Jerusalem Development Fund and Fatah activist from Jerusalem, who says: ‘It’s just a blind war against all voices that are criticising the occupation and the abuse of the human rights of the Palestinians.’ 

Which reality is true? Is Israel trying to suppress Palestinian civil society, or is it a legitimate grievance against terrorist organisations? After reviewing the importance of the NGOs and their terrorism connections, where one falls seems to be a matter of priorities.

The NGOs have rejected the accusations, but groups like NGO Monitor assert that there is enough open-source documentation to prove that the only thing under attack is terrorism.

The open-source evidence against the Palestinian NGOs that Professor Steinberg presents should suffice, but if it is not presented by professional public relations specialists, it falls on deaf ears. Israel has a long history of PR failures.

Defence ministry spokespersons, diplomats, politicians, especially our prime ministers barely manage to convince the convinced. Call it propaganda, information dissemination or any other name, we need it!!

Let’s consider one of the banned NGOs: Established in 1979 and based in Ramallah, Al-Haq is arguably the most prominent NGO with connections with dozens of international human rights bodies, which describes itself as a human rights NGO that ‘documents violations of the individual and collective rights of Palestinians.’ 

Al-Haq was the first NGO that drew Steinberg’s suspicion of PFLP connections, “and in many ways is the most significant.” he said.

“Al-Haq is headed by Shawan Jabarin, who sat in an Israeli jail for a while, was convicted of being an active member of the PFLP. At Jabarin’s trial the court ruled that he is a human rights worker by day and a terrorist official by night.” Steinberg said.

According to NGO Monitor, in 2018, Visa, Mastercard, and American Express shut down online donations to Al-Haq due to PFLP ties.

Al-Haq asserted in a statement that the “baseless allegations” seek “to delegitimise, oppress, silence” Palestinian NGOs. It argued that the decision is not based on security concerns, but comes due to “the opening of an International Criminal Court investigation.”

Sinijlawi finds it suspicious that “these organisations are leading the procedure in the ICC, where Gantz himself is the main target because he was the IDF chief of staff in 2014.”

Since its formation in 1979 the ICC has aroused considerable controversy. It has

faced a number of complaints from both states and NGOs, including objections about its jurisdiction, accusations of bias, questioning of the fairness of its case-selection and trial procedures, as well as doubts about its effectiveness.

British barrister Karim Khan was elected to replace the court’s lead prosecutor Fatou Bensouda of Gambia. There’s good reason to believe that Karim Khan will be fairer in his case-selection and trial procedures than his predecessor.

                      International Criminal Court Prosecutor Karim Asad Ahmad Khan QC.

 

I doubt if the Israel Defence Ministry’s decision regarding the six Palestinian NGOs was made out of concern for the welfare of Defence Minister Gantz.

The NGO debate is by no means new. I mentioned it in a piece I wrote in 2015. Then and now the NGO activity is literally mind-boggling. Here’s an extract from what I wrote then: “The innumerable ‘Watch NGOs’ in Israel that claim they are indeed the watchmen’s watchers are cause for concern. In many instances they are more of a bane than a boon. Admittedly some definitely do a lot of good, but others are not so well-intentioned keepers' keepers. Now in order to defend ourselves from our enemies, especially the foes with subtle insidious intentions, we need to watch the keepers’ keepers.

While many NGOs perform a variety of services and humanitarian functions, others are politically motivated with well defined agendas.

A group of former Israeli soldiers claiming to expose the IDF’s alleged human rights violations is currently cause for concern. Their latest activities are in fact aiding and abetting the BDS movement.

The ex-servicemen’s group, ‘Breaking the Silence,’ says that without its work, accounts of improper or even illegal behaviour against Palestinians would remain hidden from the Israeli public.

Since its founding in 2004, ‘Breaking the Silence’ has collected the testimonies of more than 1,000 veterans in a bid to expose the IDF’s alleged illegal actions in the West Bank. It has taken those accounts to audiences in Israel and around the world. However, the NGO has an obvious political agenda.   Its uncorroborated testimonies have been lodged by veterans unwilling to reveal their identities   CTV news reported that ‘Breaking the Silence’s’ seemingly authentic narratives come at a time when Israel is confronting a growing boycott movement focused on companies doing business in the West Bank settlements.

Yediot Ahronot columnist Sever Plocker gave low points to the boycotters. ‘The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement against Israel hasn't achieved much so far. Not a single major foreign investment fund operating in Israel has left, and not a single corporation has severed its ties with Israel.’

‘Nonetheless, the risk from the BDS activity is definitely not a trivial thing: Being anti-Israel is now the dominating fashionable trend among students and young professionals in the West. Being progressive means identifying with BDS. The battle against Israel, under different slogans, replaces the other political battles for many young men and women and allows them to fulfill their rebelliousness without paying any personal price.’ Wrote Sever Plocker.

 

Viewing the BDS campaign against Israel, Cary Nelson Professor of Liberal Arts and Sciences at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign said.

“BDS actually offers nothing to the Palestinian people, whom it claims to champion. Perhaps that is the single most cruel and deceptive feature of the BDS movement. Its message of hate is a route to war, not peace.” 

 At this juncture I want to add a margin note: I’m not sure if the Ben and Jerry’s episode is a case in point. It seems that the boycotters are rapidly being boycotted. Last month Arizona became the first state to pull the trigger on divesting from Unilever and Ben & Jerry’s in response to its settlement boycott.

Texas has officially added Ben & Jerry’s and its parent company Unilever to a list of companies that boycott Israel, a further step on the path to the state divesting some $100 million from the companies. The decision was made possible due to the Texas boycott law’s broad definition of Israel that includes the “territory’s that it controls” — i.e., the West Bank.

New Jersey has announced that it was on the path to follow suit, while New York, Florida, Illinois, Maryland and Rhode Island have launched formal proceedings.

 

Of course, the need to watch the watchmen and their watchers too has a positive attribute, it creates jobs!

 

Take care.

 

Beni                                                                                                    2^nd of November, 2021.