Palestinian organizations refuse to sign U.S. anti terror document
By Itamar Marcus, Palestinian Media Watch Bulletin, September 3, 2003
Introduction
The Palestinian Authority NGOs have
defied the US, by refusing to sign a declaration that they will not use USAID
grant money for terrorist purposes.
This is a major challenge to the US administration, which sees the
elimination of Palestinian terror and terrorist organizations as an integral
component of US policy. The US has conditioned new funding agreements with
PA NGOs, upon their signing an Appendix declaring the funding will not be
passed on to terrorists. The PA NGOs are refusing to sign.
The Palestinian NGO opposition is universal, following a meeting of
representatives of many NGOs who unanimously agreed they would not sign,
and called for disciplinary measures to be taken against any Palestinian
organization that signs. The Palestinians called the US anti terror Appendix
“provocative” and called on the NGOs to refuse USAID, as was done during the
Jenin battle, rather than sign.
In spite of the significant sums of money given to the Palestinian through
USAID, the organization was maligned at the event, one speaker calling USAID
a “destructive” organization, whose purpose it to “damage” or “corrupt”
Palestinian organizations.
The following is the declaration that the Palestinian NGOs refuse to sign:
“The beneficiary institution has not supplied, and will not supply in the future,
any material or other form of aid to any individual or other body that is known
or has any reason to be considered as a person or a body that incites, plans,
supports, or is involved in any terrorist activities of any kind.”
“Another appendix includes the names of Palestinian individuals and bodies that
the United States considers to be terrorists, and therefore prohibits any
cooperation with them such as the Hamas, the Jihad, the Al-Aksa
Martyrs’ Brigades, the Popular Front, the Democratic Front, etc.”
Organizations refusing to sign include the ‘Mizan’ Center for Human Rights,
‘The Red Crescent’ and the ‘Federation of Sanitation Activities’.
The refusal is based on the PA policy that refuses to see murder of
Israelis including suicide bombings as terrorism. The current opposition to
suicide bombings, as it is often stressed within the PA, is because of the
negative political conditions that make suicide bombings politically detrimental,
and not because suicide bombings are terror. Suicide bombings are defined as
“legitimate resistance” .
The organizations say they do not want to be “captive to the funding
conditions” set by the US.
PMW Background Info
As background it should be noted that USAID policy in the past has had
confusing components when in came to demanding PA compliance to US anti
terror policy.
PMW reported in August 2002 that a PA school receiving USAID funding
was named after the terrorist Dalal Mughrabi, who had participated in the
murder of 36, including an American. USAID response at the time was to cut
off aid. However, the very next day the aid was reinstated, following a PA
promise to change the name.
However a week later PMW reported that the PA was still using the
terrorist’s name, referring to a ceremony in the Dalal Mughrabi school.
The following are texts from articles that have appeared in recent days showing
the uniform rejection by PA NGO’s of the American terms.
“Relations between the American Agency for International Development
and the Palestinian civic organizations are undergoing a true crisis. The
American Agency has announced that its signature is conditioned
on agreements with Palestinian organizations receiving grants ,
and from non-governmental Private Voluntary Organizations,
upon the inclusion of the Appendix.
“Many experts and representatives of private institutions are warning against
signing the document, which includes the conditions imposed by the American
Development Agency, USAID, on funding Palestinian institutions.
They explained that the civic organizations are not political institutions,
and therefore the United States’ demand lacks any legal validity, because it is
of a political nature. They also emphasized that it is important to stand with the
Network of Private Organizations which reject this document and to prepare a
memo that will be signed by the private institutions and published in the press,
and to take disciplinary steps against members of the Network of Private
Organizations who violate the accepted policy …”
“Senior officials and representatives of many institutions were present at the
conference that was held at the hall of the Red Crescent Organization in Gaza.
The director of the Red Crescent Organization, Dr. Chaider Abd Al-Shaffi,
stated: “The objective behind the message that was received from this
American institution regarding financing and aid is well known. The basis of the
rejection of the United States’ request, is that our institutions are not
political…”
“ the position against this document that is
emerging in the Bank and in the Strip should be solidified,
because it relates to all of the civic institutions, including parties. The
goal is to contend with this US provocation and its provocative conditions. This
provocation indicates a pro-Israel political position.”
“The representative of the Federation of Sanitation Activities, Dr. Rabah
Mohana, stated: “From the experience with the Agency for Development,
it emerges that we are talking about a destructive institution, because it creates
a link with salary and administration in order to turn the organization captive to
the funding conditions. The Agency for Development is subordinated to the
U.S. State Department, and it executes its policies. In addition, it has no
connection with private institutions, but in actual fact the agency executes
American policy in order to damage civic institutions…”
“The director of the ‘Mizan’ Center for Human Rights, attorney Issam Yunes,
stated: “There is no legal basis for this document. This document should be
boycotted, including the local authorities, political parties and universities.
These institutions should reject this document completely, as it puts them in
great danger. We should publicize a list of any institutions that agree to the
conditions in the document.”
“Amar Sheban, the economist, called for the adoption of the position that was
taken while the events took place in the Jenin refugee camp, when American
aid was rejected.”
“Yesterday the network of local Palestinian organizations conducted a meeting
of civic institutions. The subject was the problem of the conditions imposed by
the American Agency for Development USAID… following the rejection by
Palestinian civic organizations of this step, since it imposes conditions upon
funding of the Palestinian developmental institutions.”
“The network and the committee emphasized the refusal of the institutions this appendix. They considered its content to be a clear violation of the
Law of Charitable Organizations and Palestinian Local Staffs, section 1 of the
year 2000, in which the institutions declared their absolute obligation to
implement all of its clauses. They stated that the appendix in the joint
agreement is a breach of the sovereignty of the local Palestinian
activities, which could diminish the ability of this important sector to continue
and participate in the development and growth of Palestinian society.”
“The committee and the network have made clear that the Palestinians have
declared, on several occasions, their sweeping opposition to terror – and
therefore the linkage between legitimate resistance and terror is considered
non-suitable to the Palestinian reality.”
“Needless to say, the signature of the Palestinian civic organizations on this
appendix will place them in a great principal and practical dilemma… It is clear
that the Palestinian civic organizations and the United States disagree
fundamentally in their definition of terror and terrorist activities. The civic
organizations distinguish between actions and activities for national liberation
and terrorist acts as the latter are expressed through actions carried out by the
forces of the Israeli occupation, which are definitely a type of state terror
against an unarmed people.”
“We believe that the American Agency for International Development needs to
reassess its decision regarding the signing of the appendix mentioned above,
especially while the appendix and its content create a precedent to perpetuate
the principle of conditional funding which contradicts the principle of
independent local action.”
