Pulling the Plug on the NGO Propaganda Industry

In the ongoing plague of Jew-hatred and Israel derangement, the propaganda war led by powerful nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) plays a central role. Since the Oct. 7 Hamas atrocities, the multi-billion-dollar NGO industry has pumped out a continuous stream of false accusations (lies) accusing Israel of apartheid, starvation, ethnic cleansing, war crimes, etc. 

In the past month, the superpowers — Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch (HRW), and Médecins Sans Frontièrs  (MSF, or Doctors Without Borders) issued hundreds of pages of bogus “reports” in the cynical campaign that weaponizes human rights to demonize Israel with the stamp of “genocide.” Oxfam joined with a scurrilous attack falsely claiming that Israel’s actions to prevent Hezbollah’s murderous strikes from Lebanon were also “war crimes.”

Following the standard pattern for over 25 years, the NGOs’ allies among mainstream journalists gave the propaganda major coverage – copied directly from the press releases, since almost no one reads the repetitive word salads and jargon in the actual reports. For example, a New York Times headline read: “Amnesty International Accuses Israel of Genocide in Gaza” and the CNN version (written by Nada Bashir) is “Amnesty International says there is ‘sufficient evidence’ to accuse Israel of genocide in Gaza.” The same is true for social media platforms and the anonymous editors of Wikipedia, who dictate the anti-Zionist narrative. The genocide inversion that labels the Jewish state as the equivalent of Nazi Germany ostensibly proven by these “highly respected” and “unbiased” organizations is then parroted by UN officials, politicians, and academics in frameworks claiming to focus on human rights and international law.  

The central role of the NGOs in promoting this agenda has been documented in detail but that has not stopped or significantly slowed the disinformation juggernaut. The leaders of these organizations have been named and shamed, and their obsessive hostility to Israel and research facades have been repeatedly exposed, but they are undaunted.  

The main reason for the poisonous impact is the power of the NGO industry, which is the direct result of their massive funding and protected legal status as nonprofits and charities. In 2022, MSF’s budget was $2.4 billion; in 2023, HRW spent $116 million, and for Amnesty, total 2022 income was $400 million. These huge amounts give the NGO superpowers the resources to produce slick publications and graphics, and to employ armies of press manipulators who market their pseudo-legal “research reports” to mainstream journalists and social media influencers, as well as directly to politicians, UN and government officials, and university professors.  

Another factor that exacerbates the power of the heads of the NGO industry is the fact that, in contrast to legitimate business frameworks, there are no independent checks and balances. The boards of directors that have legal and moral responsibility for NGO oversight are usually rubber stamps. When HRW’s Ken Roth received a large check from a Saudi billionaire, highlighting the deeply ingrained hypocrisy of an organization that claims to promote moral values, the board was apparently left in the dark. When the details were leaked eight years later, HRW’s board took no action. 

Although the NGOs are registered as charitable organizations by the Internal Revenue Service, the U.K. Charity Commission and similar agencies and receive the benefits that derive from this status — particularly the ability to receive funds as tax-exempt donations — these groups are far from the small, altruistic volunteer organizations this status is designed to assist. Their massive budgets and staffs, and divisive political agendas are fundamentally inconsistent with the generally accepted characteristics of nonprofits that are entrusted with providing important benefits to society at large. 

Furthermore, as charities, Amnesty, HRW and MSF (registered in the U.S. as Doctors Without Borders) are able to hide their key funders, including foreign governments, which is also inconsistent with the principles of civil society organizations. Amnesty created a very complex legal framework based in the U.K. which enables them to avoid revealing major sources of funding. And in 2009, HRW stopped publishing its list of funders, coinciding with the withdrawal of many of the original donors following founder Robert Bernstein’s denunciation in the New York Times of the organization’s central role in “turning Israel into a pariah state.” Sarah Leah Whitson, then HRW’s Middle East director, traveled to Saudi Arabia, Libya and probably other Arab countries to raise funds. For many years, HRW and Whitson denied receiving donations from the region, but subsequent leaks exposed major “gifts” including from Qatar, and there is a high probability that more are still hidden. When foreign governments control the NGO purse strings, they can also dictate political agendas and personnel decisions. 

As these details demonstrate, a major and externally imposed reform of the politicized NGO industry is long overdue. As a first step, removing the reporting exemptions for nonprofits and charities that allow the superpowers to hide their donors, including foreign governments such as Qatar that use these organizations to manipulate policies, should be an urgent priority for the U.S. Congress and the IRS. Other countries — particularly Canada and the U.K. — should also be urged to adopt similar transparency measures that are considered essential dimensions of democratic societies.  

Removing the reporting exemptions for nonprofits and charities that allow the superpowers to hide their donors, including foreign governments such as Qatar that use these organizations to manipulate policies, should be an urgent priority for the U.S. Congress and the IRS.

In addition, there is no justification for allowing governments to secretly or openly provide funds to “nongovernmental organizations,” particularly those that engage in blatant political lobbying. The leaders of the NGO political superpowers hide their foreign state funders because they realize that, although legal, being seen to be acting on behalf of tyrannical regimes, such as Qatar, is inconsistent with the “human rights” and “humanitarian aid” image that the NGOs project. The massive loophole needs to be shut.  

In parallel to revising the nonprofit regulations, including requiring transparency in reporting all funders, the boards of the NGO superpowers should no longer be limited to rubber-stamping the agendas and decisions of the organizations’ leaders. Instead, board members must be held responsible for oversight, and could be the subject of lawsuits if they fail to uphold their fiduciary and other duties. 

The fundamental reform of the NGO industry, and particularly the superpowers like Amnesty, HRW, MSF and Oxfam, will not end the obsessive focus on Israel, disinformation and lawfare campaigns. But these steps will pry open the very powerful sources of demonization and hate to public scrutiny, and reduce their unchecked and illegitimate influence.

Gerald M. Steinberg is emeritus professor of politics at Bar Ilan University in Israel, and founder of the NGO Monitor research institute in Jerusalem.