Nevertheless, public sentiment is turning against I/NGOs globally. In Russia, President Vladimir Putin banned undesirable I/NGOs in 2012. They were labeled 'foreign agents' operating with foreign funds. Government authorities were given draconian powers to ban I/NGOs and take action against their employees. Even bank accounts of such organizations were closed. As if this was not enough, provision was made to expel their employees from the country or to imprison them for up to six years if they were found guilty of acting against Russian interests.Amnesty International criticized Russia for its repression of I/NGOs. Echoing this sentiment, the United Sates also viewed such activities as a troubling sign. But despite the criticism from the rights groups and international community, Russian authorities feel such steps are necessary to save the country from further disintegration. It is argued that even the US known for democratic values hardly allows I/NGOs to receive funding from Russia to, say, oppose the war in Iraq.
But the image of I/NGOs in general has deteriorated a lot over the years. The British parliament has lashed out against its I/NGOs. In South Asia, Pakistan ordered international children's aid agency, Save the Children, to close its operation last year and its staffs were asked to leave the country within 15 days. This organization had been working in Pakistan for 35 years and employed 1,200 people. But Save the Children was feared to be working against the country's interest.
In India, the Modi government cancelled the Foreign Contribution Regulatory Authority (FCRA) registration of 10,117 NGOs in 2015, including that of Greenpeace and put 16 foreign donors like the Ford Foundation on its watch list for violating legal norms. Accordingly, the bank accounts of several NGOs, including Greenpeace India, were frozen. The Ford Foundation, which had been working in India since 1950s was suspected of using its resources to foment communal unrest. There are over two million legally registered NGOs in India and altogether there are around three million. Interestingly, the number of the NGOs in India is twice the size of its security forces.
It is suspected that a number of I/NGOs in India have prevented the country from rising as a major power at the direction of their controllers in London and Washington. NGOs funded by the US, the UK, Germany, the Netherlands and Scandinavian countries raised people-centric issues with a view to stalling development projects in India, including Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor, Gujarat Special Investment Regions and the Par-Tapi Narmada Link Project. Also, India's atomic energy program could not succeed because of certain activities of US-based NGOs.
Desperate, Greenpeace India tried to mobilize support from all over the world in 2015 and to persuade UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to speak up in favor of free speech in India. The American ambassador to India, likewise, criticized Indian government's move to ban NGOs. US State Department deputy acting spokesperson Marie Harf stated that civil society organizations in India experienced difficulties after the Foreign Contributions Regulations Act was enforced.
However, the Indian government action against certain NGOs was not without reason. The Indian intelligence agencies had identified Greenpeace India and several other NGOs as a threat to the country's economic security. On top of this, the Sangh Parivar was suspicious of the activities of NGOs in general. So the Rashtriya Swayamseval Sangh's mouthpiece Organiser wanted the US and other countries to come clean on foreign-funded NGOs. It was critical of I/NGOs which failed to use foreign funds for intended purpose.
In Nepal, around 190 INGOs from 25 countries are affiliated with the Social Welfare Council (SWC) and they spend close to Rs 10 billion annually on multi-year projects run by NGOs. Following the deadly earthquake of April 25, 2015, 100 more INGOs entered the country. But of those organizations only 13 were registered with the SWC. It is believed that many I/NGOs directly or indirectly support politicians.
They also maintain strong nexus with bilateral and multilateral development partners. Many I/NGOs are believed to have harmed national security and disturbed communal harmony. Often such organizations take away 50 to 90 percent of their pledged amount in the form of administrative and technical support.
Most I/NGOs in Nepal misuse their mandate in the absence of adequate rules and regulations. In 1990s many useful projects in Nepal, including Arun III (in which World Bank was expected to invest) and Nepal-India Joint Venture Pancheshwar Multi-purpose Project were aborted due to irresponsible opposition from I/NGOs. In certain quarters it's said that Nepal's new constitution was prepared to serve the interests of certain power blocks supported by I/NGOs. Unfortunately, the SWC has not been able to monitor their activities properly. The government in many cases is not even aware of their activities.
Time has come for Nepal not to think but to act against I/NGOs that have been working against Nepal's national interest. The documents and accounts of such organizations need to be closely studied to curb their illegal activities. The connections between political leadership and I/NGOs need to be exposed. This is important. I would go to the extent of arguing that if the wanton activities of I/NGOs are not curbed, the country might soon be listed among failed states.
The author is a Kathmandu-based economist
Related story
Nepal bans all international incoming flights from March 22 to...
