theguardian.com
UK Charities Donate Millions to Israeli Settlement School
Two UK charities transferred £5.7 million to a high school in the Israeli settlement of Susya in the occupied West Bank between 2017 and 2021, with the endorsement of the Charity Commission, despite concerns about the legality of the settlement under international law and its impact on the Palestinian population.
- What are the immediate consequences of the £5.7 million donation from UK charities to a school in the Israeli settlement of Susya?
- Two UK charities, Kasner Charitable Trust (KCT) and UK Toremet, transferred approximately £5.7 million to a high school in the Israeli settlement of Susya in the occupied West Bank between 2017 and 2021. This donation, endorsed by the Charity Commission, significantly increased the school's budget, leading to growth in student enrollment, staff, and the overall settlement population. The school is considered a major source of employment within Susya.
- How did the Charity Commission's response to concerns about the legality of the donation influence the subsequent actions of the involved charities?
- This substantial funding of a school in Susya, an Israeli settlement established on land claimed by Palestinians, raises concerns about UK involvement in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The donation's impact extends beyond education; it bolsters the settlement's infrastructure and contributes to the displacement of Palestinians. The Charity Commission's approval, despite the illegality of the settlement under international law, highlights a significant regulatory gap.
- What are the potential long-term consequences of this case for the regulation of charitable donations to Israeli settlements and the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
- The long-term implications of this case are substantial. The precedent set by the Charity Commission's approval could encourage further donations to Israeli settlements, exacerbating the conflict and potentially violating international law. Future legal challenges and increased scrutiny of charitable donations to the occupied territories are likely.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the story around the illegality of the settlement and the controversy surrounding the donations, emphasizing the negative aspects and potential illegality. The headline and introduction immediately highlight the controversial nature of the donations, setting a critical tone. The inclusion of strong quotes from critics further reinforces this negative framing. While the responses from the charities are included, they are presented after the critical perspectives, potentially diminishing their impact.
Language Bias
The article uses charged language such as "illegal settlement," "occupied territories," and "appalling." These terms carry strong negative connotations and shape reader perception. While necessary to reflect the ongoing debate, the repeated use might influence the reader towards a more critical viewpoint. Neutral alternatives could include 'disputed territory,' 'West Bank settlement,' or 'controversial donations.'
Bias by Omission
The article omits discussion of the potential benefits the school provides to its students and the broader community, focusing primarily on the political controversy surrounding its location. It also doesn't detail the educational curriculum or the school's stated mission, which could provide context for understanding the charities' donations. The viewpoints of those who support the school and the donations are largely absent, besides brief mentions in quotes.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by framing the issue as a simple choice between supporting an illegal settlement or not, ignoring the complexities of the situation and the potential benefits of the school's educational programs. The narrative doesn't fully explore the nuances of international law, the differing interpretations of the legality of the settlement, or the potential positive impacts on the lives of students.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the donation of millions of pounds from UK charities to a school in an Israeli settlement in the occupied West Bank. This action undermines international law, fuels the conflict, and perpetuates human rights violations against Palestinians. The involvement of UK charities and the Charity Commission's response raise serious questions about accountability and the upholding of international humanitarian law and principles of justice. The actions of the involved charities directly contradict the pursuit of just and peaceful societies, as called for by SDG 16.