[Opinion] Governments Must Improve Anti-Terror Vetting of Humanitarian Aid
[Excerpts]
In the world of humanitarian aid, governments often entrust NGOs with millions in taxpayer funds, expecting them to act with integrity and transparency, especially in conflict zones. However, recurring instances of aid diversion by terrorist organizations should spur government action to ensure that their assistance is not diverted to these actors in places like Lebanon, Gaza, and Yemen.
Donor governments, including the United States—now and under the incoming Trump administration— must improve vetting processes to identify terror-linked and terror-supporting actors and their partners, and deny them taxpayer funds and materials. Unfortunately, international aid agencies work to undermine this goal.
The Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC)—which receives substantial funding from Western governments, including from the United States, UK, and Germany—demonstrates the extent of NGO opposition to anti-terror vetting.
In the recent conflict between Hezbollah and Israel, during which the Lebanese-based terrorist organization bombarded Israeli civilians with rocket and drone attacks for more than a year before a ceasefire was reached in November, NRC distributed cash aid in Hezbollah’s stronghold of southern Lebanon. Even amid the current ceasefire, the lack of proper oversight allows such funds and resources to flow freely, raising the risk that they will be diverted to Hezbollah operatives rather than civilian relief. Similarly, NRC has distributed cash in Gaza during the current war.
Despite concerns regarding aid diversion, NRC staunchly opposes vetting of its beneficiaries for terror ties, and at a December 2020 conference, NRC Secretary-General Jan Egeland demanded “Exemptions from counter-terrorism laws and sanctions regimes … We need blanket humanitarian exemptions.” He added, “We need you to champion that there will be no vetting of the ultimate beneficiaries of humanitarian relief.” Likewise, an NRC toolkit states that it will engage with armed groups, including terrorists, in order to gain access to vulnerable populations. This not only ignores serious security implications but invites exploitation by terrorists who can divert aid to support their operations—thereby compromising humanitarian efforts.
