It Dawning On NGOs What ‘NGO’ Stands For

Perhaps defining themselves a non-governmental organizations should by definition require that in fact they not be de facto agents of foreign governments.

Tel Aviv, July 14 – Following the passage of a law mandating greater disclosure for Non-Governmental Organizations that receive more than fifty percent of their funding from foreign government entities, the directors of such organizations are beginning to realize what the “non-governmental” phrase in the term means.

Organizations such as B’tselem, Breaking the Silence, and other NGOs have reacted with dismay and alarm since such a law was proposed during the previous Knesset term, as have various arms of the European Union and Obama administration. But whereas publicly those bodies rail against the law as a threat to Israeli democracy, privately a number of NGO directors have voiced a dawning awareness that perhaps defining themselves as non-governmental organizations should require that in fact they not be de facto agents of foreign governments.

“Maybe there should be another category of organization,” suggested one organizational director, speaking on condition of anonymity. “I mean, there already is the concept of foreign agent, but that sounds too sinister, and we could never get away with foisting our extreme left-wing agenda on the public if we were perceived as doing the bidding of foreign governments. We’re kind of in a bind like this.”

Another activist confessed that the terminology had bothered her for a long time. “When we accepted millions of dollars from the European Commission over the years the money functionally blinded us to the contradiction between our activities and our status as non-governmental,” she explained. “It was glaring, and my colleagues and I noticed it but chose to ignore it as long as the cash was flowing freely and we didn’t have to make the extent of our dependence on foreign governments public. But lately, with all the debate around this new law, I have to admit I’m uncomfortable.”

“Not uncomfortable enough to change my views or behavior, mind you,” she added. “This is hardly the first time my peers and I have adopted a, shall we say, unconventional definition for a term widely understood differently from the niche way in which we employ it. Take ‘democracy.’ To most people, that means accounting for the views of the majority of the citizenry in formulating and implementing government policy. But given the unpopularity of our positions on a host of issues, our agenda will never see the light of day, so we have to redefine democracy in such a way that it’s the other part of the political spectrum that’s threatening it while we nobly defend it. I’m sure we can find a similar semantic accommodation for ‘non-governmental’ organization.”