Daniel Darling: Is the Red Cross anti-Semitic?

MARY REICHARD, HOST: Today is Tuesday, December 12th. Good morning! This is The World and Everything in It from listener-supported WORLD Radio. I’m Mary Reichard.

NICK EICHER, HOST: And I’m Nick Eicher. Here’s WORLD Opinions commentator Daniel Darling on criticisms over how the International Red Cross is handling the war between Israel and Hamas.

DANIEL DARLING, COMMENTATOR: Elma Avraham was taken hostage from her home in Israel when Hamas unleashed its terrorist attack upon the Jewish state on Oct. 7. She was held in captivity for 50 days by the terrorist group. She’s recovering in an Israeli hospital where she is said to be in critical condition. During her captivity, Avraham was physically mistreated and didn’t have access to her medicine. Her daughter, Tal Amano, strongly criticized the International Committee of the Red Cross, which she said refused, on multiple occasions, to help deliver critical medications to her elderly mother.

The Red Cross has been increasingly under fire for its perceived bias against Israel. On Nov. 20th, the president of a leading Israeli civil rights organization sent a letter to the Red Cross criticizing the group for letting its ambulances in Gaza transport Hamas terrorists attempting to flee the Israel Defense Force. The Red Cross has also been repeatedly criticized by Israeli officials for its seeming hesitancy to demand that Hamas allow health checks on hostages in Gaza.

Perhaps the most troubling finding about the Red Cross is that it may have been complicit in helping Hamas operate in Al Shifa hospital. A large tunnel has been found under the hospital grounds, and evidence shows that terrorists used the hospital to store weapons and hold a number of hostages. At least two hostages were killed.

Earlier this year, the Red Cross boasted about its deep involvement with the Al Shifa hospital as part of its partnership with the Gaza Ministry of Health, run by Hamas. Given that close relationship, it’s difficult to believe the aid agency was ignorant of Hamas’ use of the hospital as a staging ground for terror.

The Red Cross works in difficult and complex environments and is forced to negotiate, at times, with bad actors, in order to do its humanitarian work. Yet its supposed neutrality didn’t keep it from repeatedly criticizing Israel’s response to the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks by Hamas, attacks the Red Cross has yet to condemn.

A study by the Jerusalem Institute of Justice found that in their public pronouncements on social media since Oct. 7, the Red Cross has been overwhelmingly biased against Israel. So have organizations like the United Nations, Doctors without Borders, and Human Rights Watch. These developments undermine trust in the mission of organizations that do much good work in difficult places.

More importantly, most media rely on organizations like the Red Cross for accurate information in reporting from Gaza. The bias against Israel calls into question the Palestinian casualty numbers often quoted as gospel by many journalists. This isn’t to say there isn’t a heartbreaking loss of life, and Israel should be bound by the laws of war to do its best to avoid civilian casualties. But Israel’s work to eliminate terrorist networks is just and right, and we should resist blaming Israel for the failures of Hamas to protect Palestinians. We should also demand moral clarity of the Red Cross.

I’m Daniel Darling.

WORLD Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of WORLD Radio programming is the audio record.