Wednesday, August 13, 2025
On August 12, four mothers—Galia David, Merav Gilboa Dalal,
Viki Cohen, and Sylvia Cunio—traveled to Geneva to beg the Red Cross to do
something, anything, for their children, held captive by Hamas since October 7,
2023. I saw the story in Ynet
and hoped it might offer a reason for hope—something in short supply these
days.
I should have known better. It’s Ynet. There was nothing
worth seeing in this story, nothing new—only an anonymous Israeli source
claiming the Red Cross hasn’t been cruel or insensitive to the hostages. “An
Israeli source familiar with the Red Cross’s work told Ynet that Red Cross
officials ‘weren't empathetic enough toward the hostage families mainly because
they are Swiss and follow protocols, not because they are anti-Israel.’” In
other words, they’re just Swiss—wedded to their protocol, not to saving Jewish
lives.
The article suggested that things would be different this
time. But instead of coming away feeling better, I felt sick at the thought of
the false hope that been fed to these mothers who have been suffering so, so
hard, for so long—that something would actually be done this time, that the Red
Cross would do its job for once, and do something, anything for our hostages.
A mother’s tears are powerful, but perhaps not powerful
enough to sway the “Swiss.”
Oh sure, the mothers came away with hope. They think
something has changed. Why should it be different now? It was the awful images
we all saw, now burned into our very souls, of Evyatar David and Rom
Braslavski, looking like Muselmänner*, like the photos of Jews in Auschwitz,
skeletal, skin and bones. Evyatar has lost 41% of his body weight.
In the propaganda video Hamas released, Evyatar is digging
his own grave. Rom Braslavski, meanwhile, can no longer stand.
It is hard to believe the agonizing desperation their
mothers feel can worsen. But those images of their sons moved them to speak
from the rawest place a mother can speak, showing ICRC president Mirjana
Spoljaric photos of their sons’ faces with hollows where flesh should be. They
pleaded for medicine, for food, for a chance to keep them alive until they can
be freed. They thought, “Surely these photos will move the Red Cross,” move
Spoljaric, who, after all, is a mother herself.
Spoljaric did all the right things—the expected things. She
took their hands, leaned forward, and promised to do “everything in her power.”
Her expression seemed to hold the right mix of sympathy and resolve, or at
least the mothers thought so. They believed they had touched her heart.
But they hadn’t. What they had touched was a performance—one
Spoljaric has given before and is almost certain to give again. She said the
Red Cross will try to help, but it should be obvious by now that they won’t.
It’s been more than a year and a half since I wrote about
the International Committee of the Red Cross and its refusal
to do anything at all for the Israeli hostages. Why? They despise Jews.
During the Holocaust, the Red Cross knew about the gas chambers and did
nothing. They hid behind a label of “neutrality” when they were anything but.
 |
| PM Netanyahu Meets with ICRC President Mirjana Spoljaric, 14.12.2023 © Photo by Amos Ben-Gershom, GPO |
What has changed from December 2023—when I last wrote about this—to now, August 2025, when four mothers, evoking the four matriarchs of the Jewish people, went to beg for their children’s lives, for a bit of food and some medical attention for their sons? Mirjana Spoljaric has a son and a daughter. You might think that would make a difference—that she would empathize with the hostage mothers.
But that would be an illusion. The Red Cross holds no
empathy for Jews. This is just a cruel new act the Red Cross has added to its
repertoire: dangling hope in front of mothers in unimaginable pain, then
walking away and doing nothing. Because we know that’s what will happen.
If you want to understand the Red Cross’s true capacity for
evil and inaction, remember 84-year-old Alma Avraham. She was released in
November 2023 in critical condition: a pulse of 40, a body temperature of 28°C
(82.4°F), unconscious and with multiple injuries. Her family had begged the Red
Cross—twice—to deliver her life-sustaining medications. Twice, they refused.
Alma spent five months in the hospital fighting for her
life. An 84-year-old woman. And the Red Cross looked away and did nothing.
The Red Cross says it “can’t” visit hostages because Hamas
will not allow it. But this is not true. It’s not that the Red Cross can’t help
the hostages, but that they choose not to. The Red Cross operates in Gaza with
Hamas’s blessing. It runs hospitals. It delivers supplies. Hamas gives them no
trouble at all. Red Cross personnel have complete freedom of movement under
Hamas—except when it comes to saving Jews.
No. The inaction of the Red Cross is not about Swiss
neutrality and a need to follow protocol. In fact, the Red Cross is not at all
neutral when it comes to Israel and Hamas. It is aligned with Hamas. It
respects Hamas for October 7, for the slaughter, for the terror, for the rape
of Jewish women and the beheading of Jewish children. It allies itself with
Hamas because Hamas has done openly what the Red Cross has always endorsed
without saying the quiet part out loud—hurt Jews, mutilate Jews, rape and
humiliate them, starve Jews, strip them of all dignity and life.
It’s always been the same Red Cross—the same body that
during the Holocaust refused to speak out about the camps, even as Jews were
being gassed, starved, and burned by the millions. Back then, the Red Cross
played by Nazi rules to keep its privileges because it didn’t care what was
done to the Jews—didn’t like Jews. Today, the Red Cross plays by Hamas’ rules
for the same reason—and with the same satisfaction.
Remember the Steinbrechers, begging for their daughter
Doron’s daily pills, only to be scolded: “Think about the Palestinian side”?
The Red Cross is not a powerless observer. It is a willing accomplice—and has
been for generations.
This is the same organization that knew about Auschwitz in
1942 but said nothing, claiming it couldn’t jeopardize access to Allied POWs.
Roger Du Pasquier, head of the ICRC’s Information Department, even lied about
being “ill-informed.” And now, in 2025, the ICRC’s silence on Jewish suffering
is once again dressed up as pragmatic restraint.
When lawsuits from hostage families and groups like Shurat
HaDin accuse
the Red Cross of abandoning Jews, they aren’t exaggerating—they are
documenting a pattern. Seventy-six years later, the Red Cross still finds ways
to look away from Jewish suffering while keeping its credentials spotless.
And now here we are, with two living skeletons starring in
Hamas propaganda videos, their suffering public and undeniable. The Red Cross
says they are “appalled” and “reiterate our call for access.” Appalled?
Appalled is what you feel when a waiter forgets your coffee order. They’re not
appalled. They’re complicit.
From 1930 to 2006, the Red Cross refused to recognize
Israel’s Magen David Adom because of “territorialism”—a diplomatic fig leaf
meaning no Jewish symbols allowed. The Muslim crescent? Accepted without
hesitation. The Iranian red lion and sun? Not a problem. But a Jewish star? Not
a chance.
Even now, abroad, Israel must hide its emblem inside the hollow “Red Crystal,” because the Star of David is still not recognized as a protected symbol. A small piece of metal and cloth tells the whole story: to the Red Cross, Jewish identity is something to be concealed, diluted, and finally, erased.
Don’t be fooled. The Red Cross did not meet with the mothers
out of empathy or a desire to save lives. They granted a meeting only because
the images of those skeletal Muselmänner had leaked out before the public eye.
Some show of sympathy had to be made, or it wouldn’t have looked right.
So Spoljaric staged an audience, then sent the hostage
mothers packing with the thinnest thread of hope—an illusion of momentum. Did
the mothers really think that after seeing those hollowed-out faces someone
would care, someone would cry, someone would save their sons?
If so, that’s not what they got.
And now, visit accomplished, the Red Cross can return to
business as usual—the business of aiding and abetting the enemies of Israel.
It’s their favorite thing to do.
* Ironically meaning “Muslim men,” but that’s a column for
another day.
|
"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024) PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022) |
 |
Buy
