The Dominion - politics

Funding Axe Sharpened by Foreign Policy

Moira Peters — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 06:49:54 +0000

Cuts to NGOs in line with Canada’s stance on Palestine

TORONTO—An internal struggle over funding human rights groups that are critical of Israel was waged behind closed doors at the International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development, commonly known as Rights and Democracy (R&D).

After a January 7 board meeting, that battle was thrust into the public eye.

A newly appointed member of the board, David Matas, who is also legal counsel for right-wing B'nai B'rith Canada, brought forward a motion to repudiate the funding to one Israeli and two Palestinian human rights groups.

“These organizations were all on the same side: critical of Israel,” he told The Dominion.

Remy Beauregard, President of R&D, had previously supported these grants, but at the meeting he switched his position and the vote passed unanimously, with one abstention.

That night Beauregard died of a heart attack. His widow would blame his death on stress and the “harassment” he suffered at the hands of the board. Four days after his death, nearly the entire staff of the organization wrote a letter demanding that three members of the board resign.

“Your complete misunderstanding of your role as directors of Rights and Democracy makes you unfit to remain on the board of directors," they said. The letter was addressed to the same members of the board who were pushing to have Beauregard removed as president of R&D, and who had written an unfavourable performance review of Beauregard in the Spring of 2009.

While R&D is often perceived as a non-governmental organization (NGO), the federal government funds the group and makes appointments to the Board of Directors. In November, the feds appointed Matas and Michael Van Pelt to the board. This shifted the composition of the board, weighting it in opposition of R&D’s funding to groups in Israel and Palestine.

Warren Allmand, a former president of R&D, believes the Conservatives were stacking the board.

“If you want to effect that kind of change at a place like Rights and Democracy, you look for people who have that point of view. You don't give them instructions; you know what they stand for already,” he said.

The January 7 board meeting was the first since the new government appointments. Different versions of what happened at the meeting emerged: Canadian Press called the meeting “vitriolic,” while Matas, who was at the meeting, called it “calm, polite [and] orderly,” noting the only thing that was “unusual was that two [board members] quit and walked out. ”

Matas said he believes when Beauregard voted in favour of repudiating the grants to the three human rights groups he had genuinely changed his mind.

“When Beauregard went to bed the night, he died with the realization that those three grants which he had spent so much time and effort defending...were wrongly made.” He also suggested a more cynical explanation might be that “Beauregard changed his views because of the shifting composition and majority in the board.”

R&D received over $11 million from the federal government in 2009, and spends millions of dollars on grants and overseas charitable programs. The three grants at the centre of the controversy were for $10,000 each to B'Tselem, an Israeli human rights group with programs in Occupied Palestinian Terriories, and to Palestinian human rights groups Al Haq, based in the West Bank, and Al Mezan, based in Gaza. These groups all write reports on human rights abuses in Israel and Palestine. B'Tselem recently won an award for its program to facilitate citizen journalism by providing video cameras for Palestinians to document rights abuses and post those videos on YouTube.

All three groups have been criticized by NGO Monitor, an organization whose purpose is to expose the “anti-Israel agendas” of other NGOs. It was originally a joint project of B’nai B'rith International and the Institute for Contemporary Affairs, but Monitor is now an independent NGO.

The repudiation of the three grants took place in the context of a series of events since the Gaza War, a conflict which began in December 2008 and lasted three weeks. During that time, over 1,000 rockets were fired into Israel and numerous airstrikes, missiles and ground troops attacked the Gaza Strip. All sides agree that 13 Israelis and over 1,000 Palestinians died.

After a ceasefire, many groups believed Gaza was suffering a humanitarian crisis. In February 2009, R&D approved the grants to B'Tselem, Al Haq, and Al Mezan. Allmand claims that before dispersing these funds the staff at R&D checked and found the groups “had also received money over the last few years from CIDA [the Canadian International Development Agency] and the Department of Foreign Affairs.”

The United Nations launched a fact-finding mission on the conflict in Gaza in April 2009, and in September it released the Goldstone Report. Human rights groups had contributed much testimony to the report, which accused Israel of war crimes.

NGO Monitor was one of many groups that criticized the report for relying on the testimony from NGOs they consider biased against Israel. Im Tirtzu, an Israeli ultra-nationalist group, recently placed a controversial ad in the Jerusalem Post which targeted the New Israel Fund (NIF), a group that fundraises in the West for human rights groups operating inside Israel, including B'Tselem.

The Israeli government is also cracking down on human rights groups. The Israeli newspaper Haartz reported in January that the Interior Ministry has stopped issuing work visas to foreign nationals who work in NGOs.

In an August 2009 story in US magazine Counterpunch, Jonathan Cook wrote, “Israel's foreign ministry...has issued instructions to all its embassies abroad to question their host governments about whether they fund such activities.”

The Israeli Embassy in Canada refused to comment on this statement.

Other shifts in the funding of Canadian NGOs have taken place. Alternatives—a left-leaning NGO based in Montreal—and KAIROS—a church-based NGO that promotes social justice—have not had their CIDA funding renewed. While Minister of International Cooperation Bev Oda claimed the groups did not meet CIDA's new priorities, Immigration Minister Jason Kenney had a different explanation.

On a trip to Israel in December he explained how the Canadian government was combating anti-Semitism.

“We have defunded organizations, most recently KAIROS, who have been taking a leading role in the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions [BDS] Campaign.”

Mary Corkery, Executive Director of KAIROS, said KAIROS is not a leader of the BDS Campaign, and that the group's stance supports some ideas behind the campaign and not others.

“It needs to be taken back,” she said, referring to Kenney's remarks. “The real issue for us is that he said the way he is combating anti-Semitism is by cutting our funding.” KAIROS has asked Kenney for a retraction of his statements. So far none has been made.

“In conversations that we have had with other NGOs it has of course created a chill,” said Corkery. “There is fear of being in support of Palestinian people and groups, who essentially are struggling for land and livelihood.”

Asked which groups were feeling this pressure, she responded, “The chill is such that people don't want to be named.”

“The policy of the Canadian government in terms of Israel and Palestine has changed but there hasn't been a public discussion about that,” said Corkery, referring to the strong pro-Israel stances the Harper government has taken since being elected.

“That has definitely affected [R&D],” she said.

While the controversy at R&D swirls around funding to groups in the Middle East, it remains unclear if this signals an attempt by the Canadian government to align all international NGO funding with government policy.

“I think they are quite open about that; my understanding is that the government wants to align volunteer sector aid ... [with] defence and trade,” said Corkery.

Solidarity activists in Haiti have already seen R&D as advancing Canadian foreign policy agendas. R&D supported and legitimized the 2004 coup that overthrew Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. However, activists in solidarity with Colombia have noted R&D supports groups that denounce both President Uribe and the proposed Canada–Colombia Free Trade Agreement.

Matas said he believes the dispute at R&D is specifically about the group's role in the Middle East. “Elsewhere in the world I can't see any change as a result of this controversy. ”

However, with respect to the Orange Revolution in Ukraine and the Cedar Revolution in Lebanon—which were led by foreign-funded NGOs—he acknowledged the political objectives of R&D.

“The notion that Canada might be seen to be independent of NGOs it finances through an arm's length organization has become illusory in light of the heightened suspicion of that sort of funding. The political objective of appearance of non-interference intended by the arm's length relationship is no longer attainable through a structure like Rights and Democracy,” he said.

Allmand sees the dispute at R&D as part of the Conservative Government's broader approach.

“Either by refusing or cutting funding, stacking boards, or refusing to cooperate, they’re cutting back on organizations that are supposed to be arm's length,” he said. “They're using these oganizations in partisan ways.”

Tim Groves is an investigative researcher and journalist based in Toronto.

Carmelle Wolfson provided files for this story. Wolfson is a Canadian journalist based in Israel/Palestine and an editor at The Daily Nuisance.

Funding Axe

COMPARING THE HAITIAN AND HONDURAN COUPS HAITI LIBERTE

WadnerPierre — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 20:19:20 +0000

"Justice. Verite. Independance."

* THIS WEEK IN HAITI *

August 5 - 11, 2009
Vol. 3, No. 3

by Kim Ives

Anyone who has closely watched Washington's mischief and dirty wars around the globe over the past few decades cannot have missed the uncanny similarity between the June 28, 2009 coup d'état against Honduran President Manuel Zelaya and that of February 29, 2004 against Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Both men were abducted by an armed commando unit in the dark early morning hours, placed on a waiting plane, and then flown to a destination they had no choice in or foreknowledge of. Both were facing Washington-backed oppositions and pursuing, or at least flirting with, anti-neoliberal policies and anti-imperialist alliances. Both had large followings among their nations' poor majority.

Several journalists and bloggers have compared the coups, but two pieces stand out. The first is entitled "Haiti and Honduras: Considering Two Coups d'État" by David Holmes Morris, first published July 2 on The Rag Blog (http://theragblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/haiti-and-honduras-considering-two.html).

"The same United Nations that now condemns the coup in Honduras and demands Zelaya's return occupied Haiti militarily during the coup government of Gérard Latortue, often attacking Haitians demonstrating for Aristide's return, and occupies it still," Morris notes in his introduction.

Here are a few more excerpts from the piece:

Did Canada Help Dismantle Sri Lanka’s Peace Process?

Stuart Neatby — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 22:00:28 +0000

"Collective grief" of Tamil community paralyzes Ottawa

OTTAWA–Canada’s 300,000-strong Tamil community, the largest Tamil diaspora on earth, has been mobilizing for months in major cities in Canada to draw attention to the dire situation in Sri Lanka.

“There is a collective grief amongst the Tamil community in Canada right now,” says David Poopalapillai, national spokesperson for the Canadian Tamil Congress (CTC). In recent months this "collective grief" has brought sections of at least two Canadian cities to a standstill.

Since Sri Lanka’s military captured the port city of Kilinochchi, a stronghold of the rebel Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in the country’s northern region, the death toll within the mostly Tamil region has risen to alarming levels.

In response, Tamil-Canadians have organized fasts, parliamentary meetings, vigils, protests, and acts of non-violent civil disobedience to draw attention to what many see as a campaign of deliberate killings of Tamil civilians by the Sri Lankan government. This campaign included a march of more than 45,000 through downtown Toronto on January 30, the biggest march in Canada against an international conflict since Israel’s bombardment of Lebanon during the summer of 2006.

These actions form one of the largest and most coordinated acts of international solidarity in recent Canadian history.

On March 16, activists formed a human chain around busy streets surrounding Toronto’s Union Station, bringing swathes of the downtown core to a halt. Smaller demonstrations have taken place in most major Canadian cities.

Last Tuesday, April 7, in tandem with similar actions in England, Norway and other international communities, busloads of Tamil-Canadians converged upon Ottawa, arriving from Toronto, Montreal and elsewhere.

After a rally on Parliament Hill, approximately 500 protesters broke off into several coordinated groups and proceeded to squat several intersections in Ottawa’s small downtown throughout the afternoon and evening.

Rush hour traffic was largely brought to a halt.

Demonstrators, many of whom waved flags bearing the emblem of the LTTE, continued to block the intersections until 7:30 pm, when they were pushed back by police to the corner of Wellington and Metcalfe streets in front of Parliament Hill.

There they have remained, their numbers swelling to thousands over the Easter weekend.

“Our community is dying there, it’s going to be wiped out if we let this happen,” said Kumughan Nallarhenm, who drove from Toronto to Ottawa with his family last week to protest in front of parliament. “So I cannot sit idly reading at my home or going to the office.”

Nallarhenm’s sentiments were shared by most of the Tamils who have clogged Wellington Street in front of Parliament Hill over the last week. Many either have family in Northern Sri Lanka or know individuals trapped in the area.

Sahabthan Jesuthasan, a student at York University and member of the Coalition to Stop the War in Sri Lanka, has several family members in Kilinochchi.

“When the government ‘freed’ the area, we stopped hearing from them. We found out later that their house had been shelled and bombed,” he explained, adding that the lack of independent monitors in the most heavily affected areas of the conflict have made identifying the whereabouts of his relatives impossible.

“What’s worst is not knowing what happened to them. Nobody knows what’s going on.”

Until very recently, Canada has played a small role in Sri Lanka’s conflict.

Sri Lanka’s civil war began in 1983, following the destruction of many Tamil-run businesses during riots by Sinhalese nationalists on the eve of local elections. Tamils responded at first with non-violent protests, which were largely ignored by the Sri Lankan government. The LTTE subsequently managed to harness the frustrations of the country’s Tamil minority. Since then, violence on both sides has been responsible for over 70,000 killings along with other human rights abuses over the course of the 27-year war.

Assassinations of political leaders and bombings of heavily crowded urban areas have become a characteristic of the conflict. Prior to January, the LTTE had managed to function as a quasi-state entity in several northern cities, operating courts, tax administrative offices and even a bank.

A peace process, brokered by the government of Norway, began in 2002. By 2006, in the midst of already fragile negotiations, Sri Lankan president Mahinda Rajapakse began a concerted international public relations campaign focused upon casting the LTTE as the main barrier to peace.

Backed by former US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia Donald Camp, the campaign overlooked the Sri Lankan government’s own history of discrimination of ethnic Tamils and its funding of paramilitaries in the North. The campaign included the launching of a pro-government website modeled after the Tamil website tamilnet.com.

Canada was the first country to respond to this campaign, following the advice of lead editorials by the Globe and Mail and the National Post.

The newly-elected Harper government officially placed the LTTE on its list of terrorist organizations in April 2006. Then Minister of Public Safety Stockwell Day announced that LTTE supporters were “not welcome” in Canada during the press conference announcing the ban.

“The LTTE’s repeated use of violence,” said former Foreign Affairs Minister Peter Mackay, “is unacceptable and seriously calls into question its commitment to the peace process.”

Mackay made no mention of any use of violence carried out by the Sri Lankan government over the course of the civil war. The ban was followed by several RCMP arrests of Canadian citizens, who were alleged to have aided in fund raising for the LTTE.

No such actions have been taken to censure other nationalist elements in Sri Lanka, such as the Buddhist National Sinhala Heritage Party, which many international observers credit with pushing the Rajapakse government to adopt a more hard-line nationalist vision.

Subsequent to Canada’s decision, the EU placed the LTTE on its own terror list in May 2006.

In June 2006, the peace talks collapsed. The Rajapakse government began a renewed offensive against the Tamil Tigers. Despite UN calls for a ceasefire, the Sri Lankan government resumed its military campaign early this year.

This campaign has included aerial and artillery attacks of so-called “safe areas” into which civilians fleeing the conflict have been sequestered.

UN Human Rights chief Navi Pillay has estimated that 2,800 civilians have been killed since January, although some have claimed the toll has reached 3,500.

The Sri Lankan government has barred entry of journalists and humanitarian organizations such as the Red Cross into the region. UN officials have warned for months of a food crisis in the northern region that may affect hundreds of thousands of people. It is estimated that between 150,000 and 190,000 civilians have remained in the inappropriately named “safe areas.”

"Sri Lanka's so-called 'no-fire zone' is now one of the most dangerous places in the world," said Brad Adams, the Asia director for Human Rights Watch, in a recent report.

“What actually happened was that the LTTE ban brought about by the Canadian government and also by other governments gave a strong boost to the Sri Lankan government to go for a military solution,” says Poopalapillai.

Poopalapillai said that Canadian Tamil organizations were not consulted prior to the LTTE ban.

The CTC, along with other Tamil organizations, have called upon Canada to impose economic and political sanctions upon Sri Lanka, and to remove its consular officials from the country until a ceasefire is declared. Many in North America have also begun a legal campaign to declare an injunction against a $1.9 billion International Monetary Fund loan to the Sri Lankan government. Many Tamils believe that part of the loan would be used to finance the Sri Lankan government’s war effort.

The international protests have begun to have an effect.

The Sri Lankan government declared a two-day ceasefire over the Easter weekend, and both Conservative Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon and the leaders of the NDP and Liberal parties have made statements in recent days calling for stronger action to support a ceasefire.

Organizers say the protests, which have included several hunger strikes, will continue until Canada adopts a major shift in its policy towards Sri Lanka.

Stuart Neatby is a former managing editor of The Dominion.

Tiger and Tower

Tamils protest parliament