Biased Silence: NGOs Target Israel, Ignore Terror

Biased Silence: NGOs Target Israel, Ignore Terror

When terrorist regimes coordinated a brutal assault on October 7, 2023; Hamas launched a massacre while Hezbollah pounded Israeli towns from Lebanon, humanity called upon humanitarian organizations to speak up. Yet many remain silent, and even more shockingly, turn their outrage not toward the terrorists, but toward Israel.

Selective Outrage by NGOs
Organizations like Amnesty International, Oxfam Novib, Artsen Zonder Grenzen, and the Red Cross have issued scathing critiques of Israel’s defense operations, yet offered little condemnation of the coordinated October 7 attack. Instead, their messaging highlights Israel’s actions, often without proper context or fact-based balance.

Amnesty has repeatedly accused Israel of genocide and starvation tactics in Gaza. In December 2024, Amnesty published “You Feel Like You Are Subhuman,” concluding that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians . Earlier in 2025, Amnesty accused Israel of enforcing a “deliberate policy of starvation,” branding it part of an ongoing genocide .

Double Standards on Humanitarian Access
Oxfam also projects severe criticism. In January 2025, a survey of aid agencies, including Oxfam, revealed that despite an ICJ ruling demanding improved humanitarian access to Gaza, 89% reported that Israeli policies obstructed aid, and 93% noted deterioration in conditions . Yet these criticisms largely ignore Hamas’s repeated use of dual-use facilities, and the group’s systematic abuse of aid supplies.

Bias, Oversights, and Political Framing
These trends are not isolated. In March 2025, Amnesty attacked the European Union for what it called a failure to condemn Israeli actions, accusing EU leaders of complicity in genocide and war crimes . NGO Monitor, a watchdog that analyzes humanitarian organizations, strongly denounced Amnesty’s reports noting misrepresentations, omissions, double standards, and a skewed application of international law .

Oxfam’s 2014 “Cease Failure” report was similarly criticized for ignoring Hamas rocket fire and the use of tunnels, leaving Israeli civilian suffering out of the narrative . Such omissions underscore a persistent issue: many NGO reports fail to account for the full complexity of the conflict, erasing key security contexts in one-sided critiques.

Context from World History
When Dresden was bombed between February 13 and 15, 1945, estimates suggest 25,000 to 35,000 civilians died. The allied powers did not face immediate branding as war criminals but their response matched the existential threat posed by Nazi Germany.

Likewise, in the aftermath of 9/11, the U.S. launched the war on terror in Afghanistan and Iraq, resulting in massive casualties on all sides, but global attention focused more on the initial atrocity than on civilian tolls, understanding that self-defense sometimes carries grave costs.

Israel’s Ethical Warfare
Andrew, what sets Israel apart is the IDF’s extraordinary lengths to protect civilians, through “roof-knocking” warnings, precise intelligence gathering, and humanitarian corridors. These measures stand in stark contrast to terrorist groups that embed themselves among civilians and deliberately make non-combatants targets.

Conclusion: The Right to Exist Is Non-Negotiable
“Schoenmaker blijf bij je leest”, in English, “let shoe-makers stick to their lasts”. Humanitarian organizations should protect life and uphold human rights impartially. Instead, their disproportionate focus on Israel, while minimizing terrorism or ignoring NGO beneficiaries’ complicity,  reveals alarming double standards.

Israel is not a voluntary defender; it is a state fighting for its very survival. Condemning it for protecting its citizens, while ignoring or downplaying terrorism, is not human rights advocacy, it is moral inversion.