On July 22, 2026, Reason published an analysis by David Bernstein highlighting Shany Mor's reflections on the evolving stance of Western NGOs, individuals, and governmental institutions—collectively termed "Humanitarians"—since the October 7 conflict initiated by Hamas.

Mor categorizes possible humanitarian responses into four hypotheses:

  • H1: Neutral commitment to humanitarian needs of both Israelis and Palestinians.
  • H2: Commitment solely to Palestinian humanitarian needs, indifferent to Israelis.
  • H3: Indifference to Palestinian civilian needs but a fervent desire to see Israel defeated.
  • H4: Indifference to the war's outcome, preferring increased Palestinian suffering to fuel anti-Israel and anti-Jewish sentiments.

Mor finds that the majority of real-world actions by these Humanitarians align with H3, with a significant minority fitting H4. Only minimal actions correspond to H2, and virtually none to H1. He notes that these actors act as force multipliers to preserve Hamas' power and push Western policies that restrict Israel's military freedom and supplies.

This shift raises critical questions about why support for international humanitarian law and norms has morphed into backing for Islamist terrorist groups and hostility toward Israel and Jews, often neglecting the actual humanitarian needs of Palestinians themselves. Mor also questions how institutions once considered broadly liberal, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, came under far-left influence.

The analysis underscores the complexity and controversy surrounding humanitarian commitments in the context of the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict.

Sources