Years ago I was a big fan of Doctors Without Borders (originally MSF for “Médecins Sans Frontières”, since the group’s origin is French). Supposedly apolitical, MSF, provides medical care to people in regions where it’s scarce—a mission I like. I gave them a fair amount of dosh, including all of the $12,000 or so I got for auctioning off a copy of WEIT signed by many notables and illuminated by Kelly Houle.
Then I began hearing rumors that MSF was anti-Israel, which disturbed me because it’s not supposed to favor one country over another. The rumors were not unfounded, and MSF’s dissing of Israel increased during the war with Hamas, when it not only bought into the “genocide” narrative spread by antisemites, but also promulgated false rumors about Hamas, Israel, and hospitals in Gaza. Eventually I took MSF out of my will, diverting those funds to other humanitarian organizations. Yes, MSF is still doing good work in other places, but it will no longer have my support.
This 11-minute Quillette video, narrated by Zoe Booth, summarizes the reasons why I have cooled on MSF. (It’s largely taken from a Qullette essay on MSF called “The humanitarian mask: How activists at Médecins Sans Frontières shape disinformation“.)
I consider the “genocide” canard, the dumbest of all the Big Lies about Israel, as a manifestation of antisemitism. If you want to see why, read Maarten Boudry’s Substack article, “They don’t believe it either,” arguing that even those groups like MSF that accuse Israel of genocide are completely wrong: there’s no evidence that the aim of the IDF is to kill Gazan noncombatants or wipe out Palestinians. An excerpt:
Why then did this war have such a terrible toll on civilians, despite Israel’s efforts? There are two major reasons, both consistently ignored by all the genocide reports: Hamas’ cult of martyrdom, and the perverse incentives created by its unwitting enablers. Hamas is not just indifferent to civilian casualties; it actively solicits them as part of its military strategy. It has constructed hundreds of kilometers of tunnels for its fighters, while failing to build a single shelter for its own women and children. It deliberately fires rockets from hospitals, schools, UN buildings, mosques, and in the vicinity of humanitarian zones. Fully aware that it is no match for the Israeli army on the battlefield, it possesses one secret weapon to bring Israel to its knees: the moral conscience of the international community. If they sacrifice enough innocent women and children and then broadcast the harrowing images and casualty figures all across the international media, they can push Western nations to ostracize, delegitimize, and boycott Israel.
In fact, to any reasonable observer, it is undeniable that the Israeli army cares more about the lives of Palestinian civilians than Hamas. While Hamas invites civilian deaths as part of its strategy, Israel attempts to avoid them. Whereas the Israeli government urges Gazan civilians to evacuate combat zones, Hamas prevents them from escaping or from seeking shelter in their tunnel network. When Israel set up its own system of humanitarian aid, Hamas threatened anyone who dared to collaborate, killed multiple humanitarian workers, and punished Gazans who collected GHF food packages.
Note that those who promulgate the “genocide” myth, including MSF, never accuse Hamas of genocide, despite the fact that the terrorist organization is overtly genocidal, bent on destroying Israel by wiping out all Jews, not merely ones with guns. This Big Lie comes from willful ignorance, and, for MSF, makes their claim of ideological neutrality worthless. Yes, a few members of IDF may have aimed at civilians, but that is vanishingly rare. The majority of Gazan civilian deaths came from Hamas’s strategy of hiding behind civilians, including their tunnel system (built at huge expense with money diverted from Gaza) and embedding themselves within schools and hospitals. As Maarten notes, the death of Palestinian civilians is part of Hamas’s plan, and the more who are killed the more the world blames Israel.
Further, those who cry “Israeli genocide” never seem to mention the kidnapping of Israeli civilians on October 7, a war crime that was followed by shooting or even strangling some of the hostages. What does MSF say about this? Nothing. They have, as the video shows, “never issued a single condemnation of Hamas.” That is reprehensible but shows MSF’s own bigotry.
As far as buying into Hamas propaganda goes, MSF has, as the video shows, accused Israel of deliberately striking the Al-Ahli Hospital, despite subsequent investigation having convinced all rational observers (and yes, even the New York Times) that the “strike” was an explosion of a rocket misfired AT Israel by Palestinian Islamic Jihad—a rocket that landed in the hospital’s parking lot. There is in fact video showing the path of the misfired rocket, as well as photos of the damaged parking lot itself. As the Quillette article notes (and I’ve appended a tweet):
On 17 October, Abu-Sittah was working at al-Ahli Hospital in Gaza City when a major explosion rocked the compound. MSF immediately quoted him in a press release: “We were operating in the hospital; there was a strong explosion, and the ceiling fell on the operating room. This is a massacre.” Abu-Sittah was one of six Palestinian doctors who held a grotesque press conference from the hospital parking lot surrounded by the bodies of those allegedly killed in the blast. His testimony was broadcast globally, and presented as the objective account of a medical professional who bore witness to a devastating Israeli air strike. With the added credibility bestowed by MSF’s endorsement, his words were used to support international condemnations of Israel for the alleged perpetration of systematic war crimes.
Shortly afterwards, Israel and the US produced evidence showing that the explosion occurred in the hospital parking lot and that it was caused by a misfired Palestinian rocket, not an Israeli airstrike. The New York Times and a number of other major news platforms admitted that their initial coverage had relied on unverified claims and amended their reporting as new information became available. Even Human Rights Watch—hardly an impartial observer of Israeli combat operations—conceded that “the possibility of a large air-dropped bomb, such as those Israel has used extensively in Gaza, [is] highly unlikely.” MSF, on the other hand, refused to correct the record. More than two years later, it has still not retracted or corrected Abu-Sittah’s false testimony.
English translation of doctors from the Al-Ahli Baptist Hospital in Gaza hold a press conference among the bodies of those slaughtered by Israel in an airstrike. pic.twitter.com/GJB17tQoA2
— Mahmoud Al-Qudsi (@mqudsi) October 17, 2023
Did MSF retract its accusations? Of course not, even though Human Rights Watch—itself anti-Israel—did.
As the video above shows, MSF has distanced itself from some of the more extremist people it once endorsed, but it has not publicly retracted or even modified its claims. That too is reprehensible.
I found a 2016 article in the Forward, an Israeli newspaper, that is telling. Already stung then by accusations of antisemitism, the executive director of MSF USA denied “institutional antisemitism.”. The bolding is mine:
We are perceived by some as taking sides in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict when communicating about the West Bank and Gaza, where MSF has been operating medical programs for more than 20 years.
. . .MSF does not work in Israel — not because of any bias, but because Israel can cover its medical needs. While MSF has offered medical support at various times, including during the 2006 Lebanon war, these offers were respectfully declined, given Israel’s strong emergency medical capabilities. We are therefore not in a position to make medically based observations regarding Israeli suffering. To be clear, Palestinians are by no means the sole victims in this conflict. Hamas, the Palestinian Authority, other factions and so-called lone-wolf attackers are in no uncertain terms responsible for crimes and violations of the laws of war, such as indiscriminate attacks.
Palestinian leaders bear direct responsibility for their actions, including firing into civilian areas rockets that have killed and wounded Israelis and perpetuated fear and psychological trauma among so many.
While not witnessed directly by MSF teams, allegations of Hamas and other fighters placing weapons or command centers near or inside health facilities and other civilian structures would amount to grave violations of the Geneva Conventions. Such tactics directly endanger noncombatants, including medical personnel and patients, and are explicitly forbidden under international law. Responsibility for other obstacles to health care must also be forthrightly assigned.
How that tune has changed! The same “crimes” of Hamas given in bold somehow were neglected by MSF after October 7, 2023. Hamas is apparently seen as the innocent victim of Israeli genocidal aims. In an undated statement after the current war began, MSF tries to exculpate itself again. An excerpt (bolding is theirs):
Why are your statements so critical of Israel? Why are you not talking about Hamas?
As humanitarians, we grieve for all civilian lives lost [JAC: except for Israeli ones], and the vast majority of the victims of this conflict are civilians, including many elderly people, women, and children. Violence against civilians is never justified, and all civilians deserve protection. [JAC: what about the Israeli hostages?]
Our statements and reporting are rooted in the experiences of our patients and staff on the ground, and the actions we directly witness in the areas where we work. In Gaza, Israeli armed forces’ activities are central to the challenges civilians face, particularly in terms of access to medical care and the safety of health workers and facilities. We report on these realities because they directly impact our ability to provide care.
That is about as weaselly as it comes. By placing tunnels and combatants in and under hospitals, Hamas itself is impeding “access to medical care and the safety of health workers and facilities.” That’s not to mention their theft of food and supplies intended for Gazan civilians.
As Hamas refuses to lay down its arms, and MSF refuses to condemn their terrorism, I am closing my wallet to MSF and directing considerable resources to alternative groups like Helen Keller International, the Malaria Consortium, and Peter Singer’s organization the Maximize Your Impact Fund.
I haven’t told MSF how much money they’re going to lose because of their ideological position. They wouldn’t care anyway. I believe I told them, after they kept begging me for more after our initial donation, that they could expect no more donations from me. As for others reading this site, where you donate is of course up to you, but be sure to check out whether recipients are politically and ideologically neutral.
Glad you are directing your money to other causes.
Non-combatants in Gaza are still participants whether they like it or not. They are human munitions, human shields, and animate tools of Hamas propaganda.
Sadly you’re right to redirect your donations, Jerry. Re the subject of whether Israel is committing a genocide in Gaza, another terrific look is Mike Pesca’s “The Morality of Force” from last October, link below. Most WEIT readers will likely love Pesca’s podcast The Gist, I might add. I know Jerry doesn’t listen to podcasts but he should make an exception for Mike Pesca!
https://mikepesca.substack.com/p/israel-hostage-release-human-rights-watch-war-logic-trump-ceasefire
I see a post, which I’ve read, but no podcast. The post was good but I couldn’t find a place to listen (and yes, you’re right: I’m averse to podcasts because I can read a lot faster than I can listen.
Partly because of concerns like yours, I incline toward HIAS and American Jewish World Service. What do you think?
Before I donate I always look up where the money goes and how much of what you give goes for actually effecting change. Charity Navigator is good at that, and so is Peter Singer’s “The Life You Save” site, which, depending on what you want, tells you how to get the most bang for your buck. I don’t know these specific organizations. Nor am I donating to Jewish organization, but rather to organizations that preserve wildlife, buy up land to keep it wild, and organizations that provide medical aid, food, and clean water to poor people throughout the world.
OK, thanks! I use Charity Navigator to a fault and will check out Singer’s site when I get a chance. I should add, though, that I chose HIAS and AJWS precisely because they “provide medical aid, food, and clean water….” Neither, as far as I know, biases its philanthropy toward Jews or anyone else.
I had already quit making contributions to Doctors Without Borders some time ago, due to just the issues you raise here. It would be wonderful to know what organization I could feel good about supporting. I still donate to the International Rescue Committee (IRC), but, from their messaging, am not confident that some of their aid doesn’t end up with Hamas. And, as an atheist, I don’t want to fund any agencies with religious affiliation. At this point I don’t even trust the Quakers to not be supporting Hamas.
Check Singer’s charities and use Charity Navigator, as I noted above. There’s no substitute for browsing.
The Quakers, at least some of them, do seem to be supporting Hamas, at least what a Quaker friend in the UK tells me.
I live near and know a lot of Quakers. To be fair, practically all of them are pacifists to the point of being against violence of any kind, even in response to violence or in self-defense. It is doubtful that any but a tiny percentage support Hamas nor any other terrorist group. But they, as a generality, are critical of the idea of justified violence (i.e., just wars). I’m sure most here don’t agree with that notion, but let’s give them credit for being consistent. They would argue that they are living the life that, if everyone adopted, would lead to peace. And surely, this group is not the source of the world’s problems with violence.
As a former Quaker, I would bet a lot that you are right.
I did the same Bob. I stopped donating to all international organizations. All my charitable donations go to my wife’s Anglican church where we know how they spend the money (they publish an accounting for all parishioners): on feeding and clothing and otherwise helping homeless people in our city. The sole exception was my old car, given to the Kidney Foundation, which spends the money on, well, kidneys.
Many years ago I considered giving to MSF. I can’t recall specifically what I read that changed my mind. Something they published sounded to me as if they moved beyond supporting Palestinians into being anti-Israel. At the time I thought I might be overly sensitive without evidence. It is sad to see my instincts were correct.
Our charitable giving has changed through the years. For sometime now I have focused on the American Indian College Fund and the Northern Illinois Food Bank. I use Charity Navigator and will now take a look at the Peter Singer site that is linked.
I had a similar experience with Amnesty International. For more than 10 years I was a financial member. Then around 4 – 5 years ago I became interested in the whole Israel-Arab conflict and started doing a lot of reading and online research to get an understanding. In the course of that, I became aware of just how anti-Israel – nay, anti-semitic – AI is. I held off cancelling my membership for a while because, like MSF, they do good work elsewhere. But finally (can’t remember what the final straw was), I had enough and cancelled. I’ve since donated to Honest Reporting, Elder of Ziyon, UN Watch and Middle East Forum. Money well spent.
These days I only donate to wildlife and animal rescue causes. I guess I’ve given up on humans.
I used to give money to them also (not a lot). Used to. Like Planned Parenthood until they trooned out a few years ago.
I twitter converse with the reader Zoe Booth in Australia. She’s a top lady, lives near Bondi Beach.
D.A.
NYC
Let’s not forget the support HAMAS receives from the UN and the Red Cross. I refuse to give to both for the same reason you don’t donate to MSF.
In full agreement with you and Quillete Prof JC. I cancelled my monthly donations to MSF a couple of years ago when I found out just what they were up to. They phoned me to ask me to restart my contributions but I politely told them exactly why I would never be doing that.
I still have trouble processing the avid anti-Israel bias that MSF displayed after the October 7th massacre. My first exposure to MSF was in apartheid South Africa where they defied calls to observe a “politically correct” boycott and deployed to relieve human misery wherever they found it — including in the so-called homelands. How such a fine organization could be so utterly and thoroughly corrupted is a mystery to me.
And like you, I used to be a contributor, but after their Gaza prevarications: never again.