In a dream world, I would write about Palestinians in Israel. I would write about my experiences working and living in Israel, why I care and why it matters. I would talk about the myriad of perspectives, the layers and layers and layers of complications, melanges of heritages and cultures and languages and religions and nationalities that pretend to coexist here. Most importantly, I would bring this knowledge home, challenging the dominant memes and rhetoric and discourse. I want the world to see these debates are not two-sided and the dichotomies don’t make sense.
But I can’t. No one can. There is no support – institutional or communal – for this narrative. Working with a Palestinian NGO in Haifa for six months, I became acutely aware of the brick wall facing every non-Jewish organization in Israel; organizational support does not exist, and there is no market in the international community for this discourse. Even organizations with non-political motives are essentially black-listed simply by virtue of existing inside Israel’s 1948 borders. The government gives them no support, and major funders of human rights organizations in the West Bank and Gaza wouldn’t touch NGOs in Israel with a ten foot pole.
Why? Fear of being called anti-Semitic, anti-Israel, of facing smear campaigns by rabid pro-Zionist organizations? Fear of retribution in the international community for going against the tide? For recognizing problems inside Israel? Airing another version of the story?
Arab organizations in Israel, with very few exceptions, do not receive funding from the Israeli government.
The Amutot Law of 1980 states that no amuta may register if “any of its objects negates the existence or democratic character of the State of Israel or if there are reasonable grounds for concluding that the amuta will be used as a cover for illegal activities.” (Amuta Law 1980, 1:3; http://www.usig.org/countryinfo/israel.asp)
A proposed amendment this summer suggested refusing registration in cases of “reasonable suspicion that the organization passes information to foreign authorities or is involved in legal prosecution abroad against senior Israeli politicians and/or IDF officers suspected of war crimes.” (Also see here.) On Wednesday, the Knesset plenum passed an initiative to “support a panel of inquiry to investigate certain groups suspected of “delegitimizing” the Israel Defense Forces…. The initiative proposes investigating the sources of funding for these left-wing groups, and to determine whether money is being funneled from foreign states or organizations linked to terror activities.” These motions elicited an uproar among human rights organizations, some of whom provided critical information for documents such as the Goldstone Report. On Wednesday’s news, “Peace Now Director-General Yariv Oppenheimer deemed the move ‘another step on the path toward wiping out democracy in Israel’ … ‘a blatant attempt to persecute critics of Israeli policy.’”
In practice, the implementation of the Amutot Law goes so far as to exclude any non-Jewish organization from receiving state support. When the interpretation of “illegal activities” is as self-serving as it is in Israel, any organization not expressly and vehemently pro-Zionist faces immense hurdles. Indeed, one Arab organization whose sole purpose is providing support to mentally handicapped individuals – an entirely charitable, non-political service – has been applying for amuta registration for twenty years, and was approved only recently. So organizations working for equal rights and democracy, struggling to make the minority narrative heard, are forced to seek outside funding. Considering the myriad of international organizations, foreign delegations, and independent foundations with millions at their disposal, you’d think it shouldn’t be so hard. But it is.
For one, Israel isn’t considered a developing country, which means Bedouin organizations in the Negev face significant hurdles in receiving funding for their development needs. These villages are often without adequate infrastructure and do not receive government funding. When villages are demolished, there is support from ICAHD, ACRI, and Adalah, but little recourse is open to them for achieving basic human needs. While development aid flows non-stop into the territories, Negev Bedouin are essentially ignored.
Beyond development, one of the major funders for social justice projects inside Israel is the New Israel Fund. But the NIF faced a lot of criticism earlier this year when they amended their funding guidelines to read: “The New Israel Fund is dedicated to the vision of the State of Israel as the sovereign expression of the right of self-determination of the Jewish people and as a democracy dedicated to the full equality of all its citizens and communities.” This wording elicited a sensational reaction out of fear the NIF had bent to pressure from hawkish right-wing organizations (NGO Monitor, specifically) and would cease funding Arab NGOs in Israel.
Even when major international funders – OSI, Heinrich Boell, Ford Foundation, Danish Church Aid – do fund inside Israel, their support is relegated to projects addressing women and gender, media, education, art, culture, municipal civil rights, or economic issues. While these are critical issues, this is easily seen as treatment of symptoms, not disease. For projects and organizations that truly challenge the dominant narrative, funding is scarce and reluctant, if it exists at all.
The challenges facing non-Jewish organizations in Israel in receiving funding is indicative of the active delegitimization of political dissent about and inside Israel (such as in the case of Ameer Makhoul). Of course, it is a funder’s prerogative to determine who and what they want to fund, and they must heed the calls of their benefactors. But that seemingly no foundation will unquestioningly fund Palestinian democratic initiatives inside the 1948 borders of Israel – and that simultaneously there is so much funding either in the Territories, or of Jewish organizations in Israel – belies current attitudes towards and (lack of) awareness of the problems facing the Palestinian community in Israel. Contemporary philanthropic sentiment is one in which these are not legitimate concerns, they violate conventional ideas of stability and peace, and the narrative is not one needing to be told.
In funding like in every other arena, the question of Palestinians in Israel – what their presence and identity means for the future of Israel and/or Palestine – is brushed aside. And those of us who want to take a closer, more critical look at these questions and the fundamental contradiction of a Jewish and democratic state are, to put it delicately, screwed.
Audrey Farber has written for us several times from Israel and the US (here and here, for instance). Her activism has involved resettling Somali, Iraqi, and Burmese refugees in Maine, researching forced migration in Amman, interning at Mada al-Carmel – Arab Center for Applied Social Research, in Haifa, and blogging here and here. She is currently biding her time in Portland, ME. This post is being cross-posted at Jewish Voice for Peace’s blog The Only Democracy?.
