Advocacy NGOs in Academic Frameworks: Harvard University Case Study
Executive Summary
In this research paper, NGO Monitor documents and analyzes the extensive links between a number of Harvard University frameworks and central non-governmental organizations (NGOs) exploiting human rights to demonize Israel. This dimension has contributed centrally to the toxic atmosphere, violence and intimidation following October 7, 2023 (the Hamas-led attack and atrocities).
This case study is focused on a number of programs and academic personnel in different units of Harvard University – specifically (1) the Harvard FXB Center for Health & Human Rights in the School of Public Health; (2) the Harvard Law School (HLS), which hosts the Human Rights Program (HRP), the Human Rights Journal, and the International Human Rights Clinic (IHRC); and (3) the Carr-Ryan Center for Human Rights Policy at Harvard John F. Kennedy School of Government. The frameworks in the School of Public Health and Law School are also cited as central examples in the report of the Harvard Presidential Task Force on Combating Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias, published on April 29, 2025.
This analysis highlights the degree to which anti-Israel activists associated with biased political NGOs have infiltrated Havard’s ostensibly academic frameworks, which supposedly emphasize the advancement of knowledge, critical thought, and teaching of students based on empirical research, unfettered by ideological and political barriers. The result is reflected in pseudo-academic courses, indoctrination of students, publications, social media campaigns under the Harvard brand that single out and apply double standards in order to isolate and demonize Israel.
The NGOs discussed in this report based on their links to Harvard University programs and staff members cover a wide spectrum, including “superpowers” with wide international agendas, such as Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Amnesty International; powerful specialized groups such as Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders), Save the Children, and the Norwegian Refugee Council; as well as groups focusing narrowly on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict zone. Among the latter, a network of NGOs, including Al-Haq and Addameer, have been designated by Israel as fronts operated by the Palestinian Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) terror organization, as noted in the Appendix to this report.
Systematic analyses of the agendas and activities of the most influential and “highly respected” organizations, such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, clearly demonstrate that claims of neutrality, evenhandedness, and universality are inconsistent with the evidence from publications, pronouncements, and social media activity.
On this basis, we assert that the close cooperation between academic (or, in many cases, quasi-academic) frameworks and prominent advocacy NGOs claiming to focus on human rights is inconsistent with and in violation of basic academic norms, and should be examined carefully and ended as warranted.
Note: This research does not address related issues, such as possible funding links between the NGOs and the academic frameworks. Given the emphasis on transparency in foreign state funding for universities, based on concerns regarding the influence that such funding can exert on the academic content and activities, it would be useful to know whether there are overlapping sources of income with the main NGOs partners of faculty members, fellows, and graduate students. These are issues that can and should be taken up in subsequent research.
