In the midst of one of the worst humanitarian crises of our time, the hostage-taking of around 200 people by Hamas terrorists in the Gaza Strip, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has a responsibility. However, instead of acting as a neutral bastion of humanitarian law, the ICRC shies away from speaking out loud and clear in favour of the release of the hostages. This behaviour is not only scandalous, it also represents a blatant betrayal of the values that Henri Dunant, the founder of the Red Cross, once embodied.
Henri Dunant: A visionary of humanity
Henri Dunant, who launched the idea of the Red Cross in 1863, stood for the universal principle of humanity, for the protection of life and dignity, regardless of nationality, ethnic origin or political affiliation. His vision was an international organisation that would not only mitigate the course of war, but also ensure that the rights of those outside the conflict were protected – the wounded, civilians and, in this case, hostages. The ICRC was entrusted with the task of acting as a neutral mediator in conflict zones and providing humanitarian aid.
But where is the ICRC today, in the midst of one of the cruelest tragedies of recent years? Instead of appearing as a fearless advocate for human rights, the Committee has shown a shocking passivity in relation to the Israeli hostages in Gaza. It seems as if the moral principles once formulated by Dunant have become a farce.
The hostages in the Gaza Strip: an appalling abuse of humanity
The hostages in Gaza are more than just numbers in a conflict analysis. They are mothers, fathers, children and innocents brutally torn from their homes and held in darkness and fear. They are victims of a crime that violates every principle of international law, a crime committed by Hamas. And in such a situation, the ICRC is called upon to increase pressure, to enforce international norms and to act tirelessly to free people from captivity.
But instead of fighting vigorously for the release of the hostages, the ICRC remains dangerously silent. The organisation, which was founded with a commitment to impartiality and neutrality, now seems to have found itself in a predicament in which it places the principle of neutrality above the principle of humanity. Such behaviour is a betrayal of Henri Dunant’s vision, which did not envisage neutrality in the face of cruelty, but the fight against cruelty with all the means that international humanitarian law can offer.
The silence of shame
What could speak more against the values of the Red Cross than silence in the face of a crime against humanity? When one of the world’s largest humanitarian organisations refuses to take even a clear and unequivocal stand on the hostages in Gaza, it is more than just a passive stance – it is a moral capitulation.
Henri Dunant would not have hesitated to stand up for the innocent, regardless of their origin. But the ICRC seems to be content with the illusion of neutrality, even though there is nothing but an obligation to act in this situation. The hostages in Gaza are not political pawns, not tools for negotiation. They are human beings and their fate must be at the centre of humanitarian efforts. The ICRC, however, is failing to maintain its moral compass.
The principle of neutrality: a trap for humanity
In the past, the ICRC has often symbolised resistance to inhumanity. But in this crisis, it is in danger of losing its role as the true guardian of humanitarian law. The idea that neutrality means staying out of the complex moral dilemmas of conflict is not only misleading, it is a dangerous deception. There is no neutrality when it comes to protecting the lives and dignity of hostages. There is only one duty: to stand up for life.
Neutrality should not be used as a weapon against human suffering, but as a bridge to reach those in need. In a case like this – a hostage-taking characterised by systematic violence and terror – there is no option to remain passive. There is only the option of choosing life, as Dunant always did, in the conviction that man has an inalienable right to dignity, even in the darkest times of war.
The failure of the ICRC: a defeat for humanity
The International Committee of the Red Cross’s silence in this crisis betrays not only its founding values, but also humanity itself. The ICRC’s attitude towards the hostages in Gaza is not a sign of neutrality, but of cowardice. It is a retreat from the responsibility it bears as the world’s largest humanitarian organisation.
Henri Dunant founded the Red Cross to provide an anchor of hope in the midst of war. But today it seems that the ICRC is moving away from this ideal, swapping humanity for political calculations and not making the release of the hostages in Gaza one of its top priorities. This is not just a betrayal of Dunant’s legacy – it is a betrayal of humanity itself.
The ICRC must ask itself whether it is prepared to follow the principles that Henri Dunant once formulated, or whether it is taking refuge in the comfortable passivity of a neutral stance that ultimately only serves those who profit from violence. The world is watching the ICRC – and it is time for it to finally act.
