Attached to Paper Session
Meeting Preference
Introduction/Background
Recent and evolving conflicts such as in Gaza and Israel, the Russian invasions of Ukraine, the Arab Uprisings, the US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, and festering conflicts in Kashmir and Myanmar, have exacerbated instability and political fragility, especially in the Middle East and South Asia. This changing geopolitical environment is further complicated by evolving regional alliances, rivalries, arms races, mounting population and demographic pressures, corruption and failed governance, and excessive military and security spending (Cordesman 2020). Changing geopolitical, media, and digital communications environments have provided new opportunities and incentives for state and non-state actors to launch information manipulation campaigns against humanitarian relief and development aid INGOs.
As transnational actors, Muslim-led humanitarian relief and development aid INGOs that are based in the Global North occupy an important, but complex and precarious, position between east and west, north and south, and have enormous potential to bridge the divides between these polarized geographies (Palmer 2011). As independence, neutrality and impartiality are core values in the culture of humanitarian and development aid, INGOs in this sector avoid weighing in on political debates (Pictet 1979, Terry 2002, Forsythe 2005). However, humanitarian INGOs routinely share information about the plight of vulnerable populations that they serve, often in politically fragile environments. The information that humanitarian INGOs hold and exchange has the potential to reframe international and domestic debates on issues related to populations caught in conflict (Keck and Sikkink 1998). This has made INGOs susceptible to attack from state and non-state actors who oppose their work or are threatened by their information-sharing capabilities.
Politically motivated attacks have exacerbated the significant operational barriers that Muslim-led humanitarian INGOs face. Information manipulation by actors with anti-Muslim or other political agendas that accuse INGOs of links to extremism and terrorism can trigger investigations by Congress, government agencies, and charity regulators, and force the INGOs to divert resources intended for people in need to public relations and political communications functions to refute the allegations (FitzGerald 2024). Information manipulation campaigns can also make their way to financial institutions, contributing to financial access challenges for INGOs (Kurtzer et al. 2022). This can manifest as account closures, account refusals, and delayed or canceled international wire transfers, which can have knock-on effects on life saving programs abroad (Gordon and El Taraboulsi-McCarthy 2018, El Taraboulsi-McCarthy 2021).
Research Objectives/Questions
This research identifies the generators, disseminators, and legitimators of information manipulation attacks on Muslim-led humanitarian aid and development INGOs. It addresses the following set of research questions:
- What individuals and groups are manipulating information about US-based Muslim-led humanitarian relief and development aid INGOs?
- What sorts of arguments do they employ?
- How are the arguments set forth in the manipulated information inaccurate?
- How is this manipulated information disseminated?
- How does it make its way to policymakers? Financial institutions?
- Who is funding these individuals and groups?
Conclusion/Significance
This proposed paper follows from, updates, and expands on previous research conducted by the author. It contributes to the academic literature by examining a particular subsection of what has been referred to elsewhere as the “Islamophobia industry” (Wajahat et al. 2011, Bail 2015, Green 2019, Lean and Shaheen 2017). It fills a gap in the literature by analyzing the dynamics and rhetoric of a campaign of harassment targeting Muslim-led humanitarian INGOs and articulating the different tactics that actors use to disrupt the operations and information-sharing functions of humanitarian INGOs. Drawing on the literature on tobacco and climate “denialism,” this paper analyzes a variety of tactics and techniques employed by non-state generators of manipulated information (Cook et al 2015, Cook 2020). The proposed paper will also document how the manipulated information has formed the basis of a series of harmful activities on Capitol Hill.
References
Ali, Wajahat, Eli Clifton, Matthew Duss, Lee Fang, Scott Keyes, and Faiz Shakir. “Fear, Inc.: The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America.” Washington DC: Center for American Progress, August 2011.
Bail, Christopher. Terrified: How Anti-Muslim Fringe Organizations Became Mainstream. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2015.
Cook, John. “A History of FLICC: The 5 Techniques of Science Denial,” March 21, 2020.
Cook, John, Ullrich Ecker, and Stephan Lewandowsky. “Misinformation and How to Correct It.” In Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences, edited by Robert A Scott and Stephan M Kosslyn, 1st ed., 1–17. Wiley, 2015.
Cordesman, Anthony H. “The Greater Middle East: From the ‘Arab Spring’ to the ‘Axis of Failed States.’” Washington, D.C.: Center for Strategic and International Studies, August 24, 2020.
El Taraboulsi-McCarthy, Sherine. “Whose Risk? Bank de-Risking and the Politics of Interpretation and Vulnerability in the Middle East and North Africa,” n.d.
FitzGerald, Gerald. “Mapping Anti-Muslim Discrimination and Information Manipulation, and Its Impact on Humanitarian Aid and Development.” Fairfax, VA: The Schar School of Policy & Government, George Mason University, February 2024.
Forsythe, David P. The Humanitarians: The International Committee of the Red Cross. Cambridge, UK ; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Gordon, Stuart, and Sherine El Taraboulsi-McCarthy. “Counter-Terrorism, Bank de-Risking and Humanitarian Response: A Path Forward.” London: Humanitarian Policy Group / Overseas Development Institute, August 2018.
Green, Todd H. The Fear of Islam: An Introduction to Islamophobia in the West, 2015.
Keck, Margaret, and Katherine Sikkink. Activists Beyond Borders. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1998.
Kurtzer, Jacob, Sue Eckert, and Sierra Ballard. “Mitigating Financial Access Challenges.” Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies, October 25, 2022.
Lean, Nathan, and Jack G. Shaheen. The Islamophobia Industry: How the Right Manufactures Fear of Muslims. Second Edition. London: Pluto Press, 2017.
Palmer, Victoria. “Analysing Cultural Proximity: Islamic Relief Worldwide and Rohingya Refugees in Bangladesh.” Development in Practice 21, no. 1 (February 1, 2011): 96–108.
Pictet, Jean. “The Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross.” International Review of the Red Cross 19, no. 210 (June 1979): 130–49.
Terry, Fiona. Condemned to Repeat? The Paradox of Humanitarian Action. 1. publ. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2002.
Abstract for Online Program Book (maximum 150 words)
This paper explores the escalating phenomenon of information manipulation campaigns targeting Muslim-led humanitarian relief and development aid International Non-Governmental Organizations (INGOs) based in the United States. Against a backdrop of geopolitical instability and evolving conflicts, it investigates the perpetrators, methods, and repercussions of such attacks. Through a series of research questions, it delves into the actors behind the manipulation, their arguments, dissemination channels, and funding sources. By bridging gaps in existing literature, it aims to shed light on the tactics used to disrupt INGO operations and impede their information-sharing functions. Ultimately, this research contributes to understanding the dynamics of a particular slice of the "Islamophobia industry" and highlights the detrimental effects of information manipulation on humanitarian efforts, policymaking, and financial access for US-based Muslim-led humanitarian relief INGOs, underscoring the urgent need for countermeasures to safeguard humanitarian work.