NGO Malpractice: the Political Abuse of Medicine, Morality, and Science
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
NGO Malpractice The Political Abuse of Medicine, Morality, and Science Gerald M. Steinberg & Naftali Balanson Alex Greenberg, Editor July 2013 The research and publication of this report was made possible via generous gifts from Steve and Rita Emerson, Jonathan Tratt, and additional donors. NGO Monitor wishes to thank the medical professionals who contributed their valuable time and expertise in reviewing earlier drafts of this report. © 2013 NGO Monitor. All rights reserved. TABLE OF ContEnts 4 Introduction 4 NGOs, the “Halo” Effect, and the “Double Halo” 6 The Durban Strategy 8 NGO Politics and Medical Journals 9 Medical NGOs as Political Actors 12 Malpractice in the Media 12 Mainstream Media 13 Medical Journals 19 Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)-Doctors Without Borders 19 Organizational Structure 19 MSF’s Institutionalized Bias against Israel 22 Masab Bashir and the PFLP Terror Group 23 Medical Aid for Palestinians (MAP) 23 Organizational Structure 23 Political Advocacy 26 Politicized Fundraising 29 Palestinian Medical Relief Society (PMRS) 29 Organizational Structure 29 Claims of Non-Conventional Weapons Use 31 Medical Claims 33 Physicians for Human Rights-Israel (PHR-I) 33 Organizational Structure 33 Political Advocacy 34 Medical Claims, Torture 37 The International Campaign against Israeli Physicians 38 Gaza Community Mental Health Programme (GCMHP) 38 Organizational Structure 38 Psychological and Medical Claims 40 GCMHP, The Gaza War, and the Goldstone Process 41 BDS and the Free Gaza Movement 44 Mads Gilbert and NORWAC 45 Politicizing Aid 45 Gilbert’s Double Halo 48 Conclusions and Recommendations INTrodUCTion where NGO members may possess a certain level of expertise. he medical community, broadly defined, is morally committed With one exception, the organizations discussed to the highest standards of in this study are openly supportive of Palestinian professionalism and universality, political goals, and exploit their medical treating all those in need credentials as a tactic for furthering this agenda irrespective of any other factor. In contrast, as and the Palestinian narrative. These groups use Tthis report demonstrates, a number of highly medical jargon and their reputations as medical influential non-governmental organizations experts to make political and legal judgments (NGOs) claiming medical mandates and active on issues on which they have no specialized in the framework of the Arab-Israeli conflict expertise. consistently violate these moral principles. NGOs, the “Halo” Effect, and the Independent of the health services the NGOs “Double Halo” provide, sometimes on an impressive scale, these groups have intentionally politicized medicine, The ability of medical NGOs to exert political 4 using it as a means to demonize Israel and influence is a reflection of the wider “halo E E discriminate against Israelis. effect,” by which groups perceived to promote good principles are shielded from scrutiny. pag Their claims and reports violate professional and Academics such as Willets observe, “[t]here methodological norms, exacerbate tensions, and E E is a widespread attitude that NGOs consist of contribute to the conflict. ic altruistic people campaigning T This report will demonstrate Independent of in the general public interest, how five NGOs with a medical while governments consist the health services of self-serving politicians. … prac mandate make human rights L claims that are inconsistent the NGOs provide, such an attitude should not be adopted as an unchallenged MA with the available evidence, these groups have 2 tendentiously distort or intentionally politicized assumption…” Similarly, misrepresent the evidence Steinberg has demonstrated ngo that does exist, and report medicine, using it as that “reports and statements as fact claims based on a means to demonize made by prominent NGOs unverifiable allegations. The Israel and discriminate are routinely accepted at political, legal, and military face value by journalists, analysis is often highly against Israelis. diplomats, academics, and distorted or without basis in others, who act as force fact, and outside the expertise of the NGOs.1 multipliers for the NGOs’ agendas.” This is because the NGO community is In addition to their medical claims, these NGOs “generally understood to embody an alternative advocate on a range of issues related to the Arab- to the prevailing ‘selfish and particularist Israeli conflict, using their humanitarian work as interests’ of states, governments (including an opportunity to take partisan positions against democracies), multinational corporations, and Israel. This activism goes far beyond medicine, 2 Peter Willetts, ed., “Introduction,” in “The Conscience of the World”: The Influence of Non-Governmental Organisations in the UN System (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, 1 These practices are entirely inconsistent with the guidelines 1996); see also Peter Willetts, “The Impact of Promotional for human rights fact-finding frameworks. For more Pressure Groups in Global Politics,” in Pressure Groups in the information, see Gerald M. Steinberg, Anne Herzberg, Global System: The Transnational Relations of Issue-Oriented and Jordan Berman, Best Practices for Human Rights and Non-Governmental Organizations, ed. Peter Willetts (Palgrave Humanitarian NGO Fact-Finding (Martinus Nijhoff, 2012). Macmillan, 1982). political parties.”3 In addition, Blitt demonstrates will be discussed below, the NGOs in this report that NGOs that deal with human rights elicit – including groups based in Israel, the West “instinctive support amongst the general Bank, and Gaza – receive significant funding public.”4 from European governments, prominent private foundations, and United Nations bodies. For NGOs often use a lexicon formulated from example, over half of Physicians for Human international human rights documents adopted Rights-Israel’s income from donations in 2011 in the years following World War II, such as the originated with governments. UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Even when advocating a specific, localized, The political impact of this NGO network and controversial campaign, NGOs are able to extends beyond media exposure and fundraising present it as important, urgent, and a violation directly into the political process. NGOs of consensus norms and mainstream moral routinely “use their access to influence agendas, positions. By such means, opposition to the speak in the proceedings, meet both formally NGOs’ private and at times radical agenda and informally with the UN officials and becomes a rejection of modern civility and participating diplomats, and submit documents 5 ethics. that are quoted in the final reports.” At the UN 5 and other multinational bodies,6 accreditation An added degree of credibility is granted to E allows NGOs to join official forums, network providers of medical assistance and relief – with diplomats, and affect deliberations. In other stemming from popular notions of morally pag words, accreditation provides non-representative objective doctors who diagnose problems with E groups special access to international decision wisdom and expertise – exacerbating the general ic makers. “halo effect.” As a result of this “double halo T effect,” medical NGOs are rarely challenged on Most critically, accreditation allows NGOs their organizational biases or questioned about to submit both oral and written “evidence” prac the accuracy of their fact-finding. to various UN institutions. This “evidence,” L having been uncritically accepted by a UN body, MA The “halo effect” also compensates for the lack becomes a matter of record. For example, the of expertise in the military, legal, and diplomatic discredited Goldstone Report on the warfare spheres where NGOs often campaign. Aware of in Gaza during 2009 quoted a joint report ngo the esteem in which they are held, organizations from Physicians for Human Rights-Israel and promote highly distorted narratives and Palestinian Medical Relief Society,7 which unverifiable statements. NGO claims that could speculated about “the use of weapons whose be easily verified (or disproven) by the media are potential long-term impact on individual published without scrutiny. Moreover, officials of medical NGOs are invited to opine in even the most reputable news media on subjects outside their medical expertise. 5 Ann M. Florini, “Who Does What? Collective Action and They also solicit and receive donations from a the Changing Nature of Authority,” in Non-State Actors and Authority in the Global System, ed. Richard A. Higgott, Geoffrey broad range of well-respected institutions, often R.D. Underhill, and Andreas Bieler (London: Routledge, 2004), as a direct result of the “double halo effect.” As 199. 6 Steinberg, “The Centrality of NGOs in Promoting Anti-Israel 3 Gerald M. Steinberg, “The Centrality of NGOs in Promoting Boycotts and Sanctions,” 7. Anti-Israel Boycotts and Sanctions,” Jewish Political Studies Review 21, no. 1–2 (Spring 2009). 7 Sebastian Van As et al., “Independent Fact-finding Mission into Violations of Human Rights in the Gaza Strip During 4 Robert C. Blitt, “Who Will Watch the Watchdogs? the Period 27.12.2008 – 18.01.2009” (Physicians for Human International Human Rights Nongovernmental Organizations Rights –Israel and Palestinian Medical Relief Society, and the Case for Regulation,” Buffalo Human Rights Law Review April 2009), available at http://www.phr.org.il/uploaded/ 10 (2005): 263. FullFactFindReport.pdf. victims’ health raises concern.”8 In