Exclusive Altruism

When Humanitarians stop caring about some Humans - an Israeli Perspective

“All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others”. This quote from “Animal Farm”, describes how pigs, who initially led the revolution against their human owners, gradually betrayed their own principles to become oppressive themselves. This similar hypocrisy is currently evident globally within humanitarian organizations.

For decades now, people have asked why so many aid- and humanitarian organisations seem to be largely anti-Israel. Why is it, for example, UN resolutions target Israel disproportionately? Many Israelis know they strive to do well. For example, Israelis know their country makes important contributions to the world in many fields. Israel's many (scientific) inventions, for instance, are out of proportion to their number. The majority of Israelis also believe their army tries to stay “pure” on the battlefield in spite of an often barbaric opponent that used terrorist attacks aimed at civilians and sends rocket attacks that only aims to kill innocent civilians. Though many agree that Israel is imperfect in various aspects in the complex environment they operate in.

As a consequence of the tension. between external perception and publicity and actual experience, many Israelis and Jews the world over, experience a cognitive dissonance. Many Israelis and Jews the world over are severely betrayed and alone. Why is it that Israel, arguably the most liberal of countries in the Middle East, is the constant target of rebuke? Are there no worse actors in the region or around the world? What is the reason for this outsized criticism? Is it antisemitism or jealousy? To some extent, deeply-rooted antisemitism might play a role. However, that cannot explain it all - at least - for everyone. There must be rational and psychological factors that play a role. In any case it is important to understand the recent resurgent anti-Israel bias and. This writing is a personal effort to try to understand this.

1. “Rational” backdrop: heavy media coverage

Aid organisations and well-willing people see pain and suffering in crisis zones around the world. Israel has been in the news constantly for decades now. The continued outsize media overage of Israel is due to the simple fact that Israel and Jews seem to be newsworthy. Foreign journalists often come on a mission with an agenda and some excitement. Staying in the holy land is the more pleasant assignment with sun and great nightlife after all… Some journalists genuinely don't want to see Palestinians having wars on an ongoing basis. Some argue that geopolitics aggravates the trumped up journalism stances, with rogue countries like Qatar and Russia trying to prop up their own regimes by media influencing campaigns through Al Jazeerah and divisive political statements respectively.

“Lee Towers”, a famous Dutch singer, was once asked if he was not upset that the press was intrusive at his wife's funeral. To which he replied: “I fill out the Kuip (a big Dutch Stadium) because I am famous so besides the benefits you sometimes also have the drawbacks…” Jews and Israel are famous perhaps for their achievements, controversies and history of survival. Often Jews have seen the drawbacks. Yet being famous is still a choice to some extent. Sometimes famous singers choose to live a quiet life. Or is it twisted safety in familiar pain?

2. “Rational” reasons for ineffective aid: Size Effect

Many aid organisations and humanitarians do good work. However, when it comes to providing aid, sometimes there simply is a “size effect” that can hinder good decision making. For instance shortcuts need to be taken when delivering aid as the cost of proper analysis and necessary Due Diligence are too high. Just distributing aid without the checks can be considered the “cost of doing business”. For example when engaging with aid organisations like Agence Française de Développement (AFD) and Proparco revealed a crucial realisation: delivering aid incurs significant costs. Despite this, there's often a lack of robust assessment to ensure the effectiveness of the aid provided. A $4 million grant to the Palestinian Authority may receive significant due diligence at the tune of around $200,000. However, the economics don't always align for smaller-scale initiatives like a $200,000 loans - let alone micro finance loans of few thousands dollars. Consequently, to navigate challenging regions like Gaza, aid often flows through intermediary companies, with the hope that due diligence will be conducted at the local level. This approach of “spray and pray” (pun intended) has it its limitations. Corrupt governments like the PA namely control all businesses and the micro loan organisations often have inadequate resources or ability to counter these governments.

3. Irrational: Trolley Problem - on who to save and making terrible choices

Scene from the “de Joodse Raad” Ben Cohen its president was tasked to pick which Jews to save

The philosophical “trolley problem” describes many versions of the problem of either hitting one person passively or many people with a actively with a train… Does a similar thinking play a role in the thinking of the exclusively altruistic humanitarians? Some might argue that in the Palestinian conflict, Jews and Israelis are simply “on the wrong side of the tracks”. Supporting the Gazans that are certainly living in squalor (though arguably Hamas induced) is rationalised with some Jews/Israelis being killed.

Gaza and Palestinian Authority are known to fund terrorist families with roughly 8% of their budget. Furthermore, for decades now it has been clear that education textbooks are riddled with full-on incitement calling for the annihilation of Israel and Jews. This has been condoned and supported by the Palestinian Authority and Gaza’s Hamas. So it is viewed as a legitimate “struggle” and vilifying Jews is condoned. European governments, aid organisations sometimes ignore this and effectively fund another ledger of the same budget. There is a real high probability that the aid money will be used to support terror and education of incitement. Closing our eyes and actively doing evil is wrong especially if it can be avoided. Active involvement in evil and not speaking out is worse. Many, tough not all do.

4. Suspending/Disconnecting from the problem: letting others do the dirty work

Following the Enron scandal, audits became more stringent, holding management personally accountable and no longer allowing audit signatures to shield corporate irresponsibility.

Similar accountability issues arose in aid organisations. Donations often pass through intermediaries like “Faten Palestina” or “Vitas Palestine”, who contractually and solemnly declare that funds they receive won't support terrorism. However, the effectiveness of such contracts is presumably limited through vague definitions and weak monitoring. After all, who knows whether the Gaza tailor tailor who received a grant supports a Hamas member husband/son? Financial accounts are also unreliable due to known dubious practices like keeping multiple accounts. 

These lack of cross-checks makes aid organisations vulnerable to exploitation of terrorist organisations. To address these issues, aid organisations need stronger oversight and collaboration. Only then can they avoid blame and fulfil their humanitarian goals.

5. Underdog Effect - reframing an underdog to an aid addict

There is limited information of the wrongdoings of the terrorist organisations - why would you believe them as opposed to a government that has a whole array of checks and balances in place? Still many humanitarian organisations and concerned citizens, choose to support this “underdog”. Perhaps this comes from a sense of justice and a wish to identify with class struggle. Often the underdog is meant to be treated like a child who isn’t capable of looking after itself. This tendency has created a population that is addicted to aid for decades - not their own fault. It is terrible that Palestinians - particularly in Gaza - are poor and suffer often from their own regime (as some argue they voted for.). However, that does not mean Israel is to blame in all ways. In fact, aid organisations are prolonging the addiction. They are perpetuating the conflict by aiding the underdog even if induced by their government and foreign entities.

6. Dunning Kruger and “Do Your Own Research”

The advent of the internet has made everyone an expert. A simple google search can give you the right answer. Right? As long as you know what to look for…  Similarly to the cost of having to think, doing research requires knowing how to do research… “Doing your own research” is not enough. You need the right data: cross-checked, assess and know what reliable sources are. Know what reliable statistics are, you don’t know what you don't know. And with the Dunning Kruger effect at work - people that know the least tend to overestimate their own ability the most. Similarly, funds, banks, and humanitarians have limited available information. Politics, willful disinformation and language barriers aggravate this information gap. Many don’t seem to care though and simplifying gives a sense of comfort. 

7.  Machiavelli Effect

Machiavelli argued in his book “the Prince” that “The end justifies the means”, in politics. The development world, being largely politics seems to adhere to a similar mantra. “Providing aid justifies the means”: That is done through constant in its messaging - It pays to simplify. Also, being in the news and pressing a simple agenda can engender support and donations. It therefore works to rile up supporters: anger sells and keeps people engaged on social media. Portraying the situation in black and white - good vs bad people, makes sharing the message easier. If the true complexity would be described, the funders would not be as interested and the staff on the ground would be hard-pressed to do the work. Therefore, it is easily justified to simplify. It is the job of aid organisations to provide aid and to prove their existence and their ability to deliver. Language barriers and bureaucratic inefficiencies can cause issues to be understood. Therefore, at times aid organisations decide to deliver aid without checking the outcomes properly. 

Combining it all: Coining a new term: “Exclusive Altruism”

Putting all these reasons together, we create a header called “Exclusive Altruism”. Whether rational or irrational founded actions, human rights activists go on the barricades for a self proclaimed terrorist organisations is like chickens supporting KFC. The few rational but mainly irrational explanations doesnt negate that one sided activism is wrong. It just maybe makes it more understandable. Trying to create a framework of my personal understanding why it is that good people end up doing wrong things might make it easier to deal with. Exclusive altruism tries to encapsulate this concept that mental effort required to process complex information like why sadly innocent people get killed in a war. This can impose a burden on individuals which they dont want to/have time for.

What to do: Aid Regulation

In order to change the equation and adhere to the humanitarian overarching aim of “Don't do harm”, a few measures should be put in place: Providing transparency should initially aimed at. Who are these organisations funding? What have the results been? Who is auditing these organisations? Do proper due diligence processes or deliver it in a traceable way and administered by for instance women or the right recipients that have a track record of actually delivering the aid preferably “In kind”. Aid should not be given endlessly without any strings attached. The endless provision of unconditional aid can be detrimental and counterproductive. In Gaza, as in Lebanon and other countries, it seems to have prolonged the corrupt government though changes now seem to be afoot.

Conclusion

Human beings are tribal by nature. In the current global environment, where everyone has a social media megaphone and truth does not exist anymore. Humanitarian aid organisations and its supporters have lost their initial stated aims. This loss of core values and tribalism has become clear in the recent Hamas-Israel conflict through the frequency, ferocity and pervasiveness of the outpouring of global outrage. The long-term terrorist activity of extremist peace spoiler Hamas, seems ignored by most with activism often entirely outside their stated organisations remit. Clearly there is more at play than just tribalism or antisemitism. Organisations psychologically exploit a population held on a social media-drip, fed with faux outrage.

The main reasons why humanitarians have fallen short in the Gaza conflict before - and during the conflict, has a lot to do with simplification: high costs of thinking and research, to thorough due diligence of aid organisation, to psychological need to support “the underdog”. This "Exclusive Altruism" from socially conscious people and organisations also shows up in climate change debate that has lost all proportion.

While these initial thoughts are meant to kickstart discussion about these dynamics, it does not excuse or justify, rationalise biased behavious. Rather, the main reason is to try to underscore the need for greater transparency, collaboration, and accountability of humanitarians aid many of whom mean well. Moving on from rather simplistic virtue signalling, less judgement for good causes that will help all innocent people, the environment and beyond it.