THE HILL
 

Time for transparency and accountability for UNRWA

By Lanny Davis - 09/09/09 05:38 PM ET

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) was established in 1949 — so it is about to celebrate its 60th anniversary. American taxpayers are contributing a lot of money to support UNRWA — to the tune of $148 million in 2008 alone. Since 1950, the U.S. has contributed more than $3.4 billion to UNRWA—the single largest monetary contributor to this U.N. organization.

So do U.S. taxpayers get to see independent audits of how UNRWA spends its money? No. In fact, most U.S. taxpayers have no idea what UNRWA does. If they did, they might insist on more transparency and accountability for this unusual international organization.

Here are a few facts about UNRWA:

It was originally founded in 1949 as a temporary agency to provide relief services to Palestinian refugees and is the only United Nations agency dedicated to one specific group of refugees. (For example, there were millions of refugees after World War II, but the U.N. set up only one — UNRWA — dedicated to serve Palestinians and Palestinians alone.)
UNRWA’s definition of the refugees to whom it devotes its time and attention are well beyond the original 900,000 Palestinian refugees who were identified in 1950. Today the number served is over 4.5 million. Why? Because UNRWA has defined its mission to serve the descendents of the original 900,000. This means grandchildren or even great-grandchildren of the original Palestinian refugees are the focus of UNRWA’s attention — in refugee camps located in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and the West Bank and Gaza. (Some might ask: Why haven’t the Saudis, with all their oil money, contributed to finding homes for the great-grandparents, parents, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the original Palestinian refugees over these 60 years?)

The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the agency tasked with resolving refugee problems worldwide, employs approximately 6,300 staff to care for a global refugee population of 11.4 million — not counting the 4.5 million Palestinians served exclusively by UNRWA. Yet the UNHCR gets along with a worldwide staff of approximately 6,300 people. And how many staff does UNRWA employ for less than one-half the number of refugees in a concentrated area in the Middle East? The latest estimate: over 24,000 people, and most of them Palestinians — with a total budget in 2008 of over $400 million. (Some might ask: Why do the Palestinians require more almost four times the number of paid staff in the Middle East to serve less than one-half the number of people served by the UNHCR globally?)

According to the UNRWA Report of the Board of Auditors for the biennium ended Dec. 31, 2005, UNRWA does not track recording, deleting, renaming or manipulation of financial information by staff members or volunteers, and therefore has no means of detecting the alteration of financial data or other types of redirection of UNRWA funding. (Some might ask: Why not? Why doesn’t the U.N. require an independent auditor to track all use of funds and put everything on the Internet for all to see — especially U.S. taxpayers?)

These and other facts are all contained in a resolution introduced this year by Rep. Steve Rothman (D-N.J.) along with over 20 Democratic and Republican co-sponsors. The legislation is aimed at requiring, at the very least, full transparency and accountability by UNRWA. And in two specific areas — support of terrorism and the teaching of anti-Semitic and -Israeli hate — Rothman demands answers.

For example, there is significant evidence that members of Hamas, an organization that the U.S. lists as terrorist — meaning it intentionally kills Israeli civilians to achieve its announced goal of destroying the state of Israel — are on UNRWA’s payroll. According to Rothman’s resolution, in 2004, Peter Hansen, then the commission-general of UNRWA, told the Canadian Broadcasting Corp., “I am sure that there are Hamas members on the UNRWA payroll, and I don’t see that as a crime.”

Moreover, there is indisputable evidence that anti-Semitic and anti-Israel textbooks are being used in UNRWA-sponsored schools — including texts that contain negative references to Jews and omit entirely the state of Israel from maps.
Rothman’s resolution would urge the secretary of State to take all necessary measures (including, presumably, a full investigation) to determine whether UNRWA is using, contrary to U.S. law, U.S. tax dollars for Hamas terrorists on its payrolls or to further terrorist propaganda; to publish online copies of all educational materials used in UNRWA-administered schools; and to use terrorist name-recognition software to ensure that UNRWA staff and volunteers are not terrorists or affiliated with terrorist organizations.

And then there is the question of the anti-Israel bias of UNRWA’s top officials, also paid in large part by U.S. taxpayers. The record of UNRWA press spokesman Chris Gunness for biased statements against Israel is widely perceived.
Rothman has the right idea — turn the lights on, ramp up transparency and accountability, and then U.S. taxpayers and voters can decide whether they still want to send their hundreds of millions of dollars to support UNRWA.

Davis, a Washington lawyer and former special counsel to President Clinton from 1996-98, served as a member of President George W. Bush’s Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board in 2005-06. He is the author of Scandal: How ‘Gotcha’ Politics is Destroying America.

Source:
http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/lanny-davis/57983-time-for-transparency-and-accountability-for-unrwa

Comments (9)

I was sorry to see the referenced article about UNRWA, as it repeats once again many vague charges that have been thoroughly refuted.Any reader who is concerned about UNRWA's activities can check its Official Homepage, especially the section "Frequently Asked Questions". In particular, doubts about transparency and accountability can be set to rest by referring to the GAO website, which shows the latest audit of UNRWA's work.Its hard to know where to start, but let me just remark that UNRWA does not "define its mission"; it receives a specific mandate from the United Nations for every two-year period in which it operates. The U. S. government has voted for renewal of its mandate on each occasion, recognizing the vital role UNRWA plays in preserving stability and promoting peace in the Middle East peace.Finally, I am offended by the patently untrue statement that UNRWA's spokesperson Chris Gunness issues "biased statements against Israel"; no one who knows Mr. Gunness would ever acuse him of this.BY Thomas Neu on 09/10/2009 at 16:13
I'm donating funds to UNRWA, as I have watched these political attacks on the organization since Israel's war on Gaza, and they are disgusting in their craven, bigoted hostility toward the Palestinian people.BY Deborah A. Gordon  on 09/11/2009 at 19:09
I am sorry to see that people actually can support this organization that aids and abets Hamas in a variety of ways. UNRWA has become a business receiving millions of dollars and much of the money finds its way into the Terrorist coffers of Hamas. Anyone on the ground in Gaza laughs at the fools in the UN and U.S. that really believes that UNWRA is interested in the welfare of the people of Gaza. BTW,Mr. Gunness has made so many false statements and outright lies about Israel and the IDF I just don't know where to start.BY Steve Ornstein on 09/13/2009 at 09:28
War on Gaza !?! Hostility to the Palestinian people?!? What planet are you from honey? You obviously never spent time in Israel being bombarded by thousands of missles aimed at civilians and schoolchildren by that "religion of peace" group,BY Yochanna Roberts on 09/13/2009 at 23:06
Why does UNRWA even exist? It plays a huge role in perpetuating the conflict between Israel and the Arab world. Why does it have its own definition of a refugee that is by far broader than UNHCR's definition? Here is the QA from UNRWA's official site:What is the difference between UNRWA and UNHCR?UNRWA is responsible for providing humanitarian and human development services to one group of refugees, the Palestine refugees, in its areas of operation. UNRWA’s role encompasses assistance, protection and global advocacy for Palestine refugees.. UNHCR’s mandate is to provide international protection to refugees worldwide who fall within the scope of its Statute and to seek durable solutions for them, in cooperation with States, whenever political conditions allow. .UNHCR is responsible for Palestine refugees outside UNRWA's areas of operation.Does anyone understand why this agency is necessary?BY Zoya on 09/14/2009 at 02:26
Chris Gunness and John Ging are two of the major perpetrators of the corruption and dishonesty of UNWRA. Thomas Neu (postBY William on 09/14/2009 at 12:03
It would do well for the reader to examine recent investigations of UNRWA:August 2009UNRWA: Its Role in Gaza http://tinyurl.com/pd35baMarch 2009UNRWA in Gaza Terror Groups :The Connection http://tinyurl.com/n447rkOctober 2008UNRWA: Overview And Policy Critique http://tinyurl.com/onhupxOctober, 2005 UNRWA: A Hard Look at an Agency in Troublehttp://tinyurl.com/q2bm6kOctober, 2005 The UN's Palestinian Refugee Problemhttp://tinyurl.com/oewyb5March, 2003 Inside UNRWA: Special Investigative Reporthttp://tinyurl.com/ny928cFor further information, contact the Center for Near East Policy Research Ltd at CtrForNearEastP olicyResearch@g mail.comBY David Bedein,  on 09/15/2009 at 01:21
It is not just UNRWA that needs an audit. There are many UN organizations that need a proper audit. These organzations are run by people who do not want to rock the boat they all want to make sure that they retire with UN pensions, unfortunately these UN organization have become a place where what counts is to make as much money as possible, that is the reason why the corruption goes on.BY James Legend on 10/19/2009 at 19:53
As Thomas Neu writes, UNWRA receives a specific mandate from the UN every two years. Since fish rot from the head and the UN largely stopped being a force for the good, UNWRA won't change of its own accord. There is huge frustration with the UN, which has become ineffective in putting a stop to mass slaughter (Rwanda, Darfur), while providing plenty of cover for injustice. Everyone has the right to say "enough is enough". Unfortunately, no cost benefit analysis on the UN, as a whole, will stand up, since putting a richly deserved stop to it will add fuel to the flames that it has done nothing to put out. But I doubt whether the same applies to programmes taken individually. So it's time to refuse certain mandates, stop the funding, look for alternative multilateral approaches without UN involvement. For instance, no economic development and security based Egyptian option for Gaza has ever been tried because of the enforced primacy of "refugee status". In this instance, I think it could largely destroy Hamas without weakening Egyptian stability. And would that be a bad outcome?BY Max Klein on 12/10/2009 at 17:14

Add Comment

Name (required)

E-Mail (will not be published) (required)

Your Comments

You need Flash Player 8 (or higher) and JavaScript enabled to view this content

Get latest news from The Hill direct to your inbox, RSS reader and mobile devices.