Why philanthropy has gone quiet amid the Israel-Hamas war

The philanthropy sector is struggling to find the right thing to say in response to the Israel-Hamas war, and many secular foundations have remained silent despite calls for them to speak out about the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza and a surge of antisemitism worldwide. Philanthropy leaders tell Devex they are being very careful in how they discuss the heavily politicized war out of concern for how it might affect their relationships with colleagues, funding partners, or their careers. Many people within the sector who historically have been vocal about equity and human rights are horrified by what is happening in Gaza but aren’t speaking publicly because they worry they will be labeled antisemitic if they criticize Israel’s airstrikes, one U.S.-based philanthropy leader told Devex. Meanwhile, Jewish philanthropy leaders say their community feels abandoned and their trauma not taken seriously, as some liberal groups loudly line up behind Palestinians and their rights. More than 7,000 Palestinians have been killed amid intensifying Israeli airstrikes, according to Gaza’s health ministry. Israel’s government is seeking to destroy Hamas after the group’s deadly Oct. 7 attack, during which it killed at least 1,400 Israelis and took more than 200 hostages in Gaza. In the U.S., there is a “silent solidarity” of Jewish, Muslim, and secular funders working behind the scenes engaging with the Biden administration to advocate for a ceasefire and for humanitarian aid to be allowed into Gaza, said the philanthropy leader, who is Muslim — Israel and Egypt control border crossings into the territory, which has been under a strict blockade for 16 years. But many of these funders won’t speak about those efforts publicly because it’s become too controversial, said the leader, who added that they have stayed silent because they fear being barred from future employment. There is at least one website tracking LinkedIn posts of people who express pro-Palestinian sentiment. “That I can’t take a position publicly has been frightening in terms of freedom of speech,” the philanthropy leader said. Avoiding difficult topics However, some wonder if philanthropy leaders are doing more harm than good by avoiding difficult conversations. The silence within the sector, especially amid a recent spate of antisemitic attacks in cities and college campuses, is unacceptable, Andrés Spokoiny, president and CEO of the U.S.-based Jewish Funders Network told Devex. “We need you to feel our pain and assure us that we aren’t alone,” Spokoiny wrote in a recent op-ed for The Chronicle of Philanthropy. JFN is a global network of private foundations and philanthropists. “We need you to show moral clarity and work with us,” added Spokoiny, who noted that he did not support “the Israeli government’s populism and extremism” and was not advocating against providing aid to Palestinian civilians. JFN executive director Rebecca Sirbu also wrote a blog post for the Center for Effective Philanthropy urging peers against saying things to “justify” the Hamas attack. “And yes, ‘understanding’ is justifying,” she wrote. “That I can’t take a position publicly has been frightening in terms of freedom of speech.” --— Philanthropy leader JFN has since received several calls from Jewish people working at major secular philanthropic organizations expressing “how lonely and how fearful” they’ve felt at work since the Hamas attack, Spokoiny told Devex. These staffers were afraid they would be ostracized if they didn’t condemn Israel or support a ceasefire, he said. There should be open conversations about what is happening and how to preserve lives on both sides, Spokoiny said. And if pro-Palestine people aren’t expressing extreme views about Israel or “parroting” Hamas talking points, then they should not be afraid to take part in those conversations, he said. But people should be held accountable for what they say and do publicly, he added. Tepid public statements A few prominent funders have spoken up. Earlier this month, Michael Bloomberg, who is Jewish, published an op-ed calling for “a short war and long-lasting peace.” His Bloomberg Philanthropies also provided a matching gift for donations to Magen David Ogen, the Israeli Red Cross. Bloomberg Philanthropies did not immediately respond to a request for the full dollar amount. Ford Foundation president Darren Walker also issued several public statements. In his first, he condemned Hamas’ initial attack. In a second post on Oct. 19, he pledged support for “immediate humanitarian relief efforts in Gaza and the Middle East.” He did not say how much funding Ford would give, and the foundation declined to provide further details. There was swift backlash to these statements, both of which were posted on social media. Some Instagram users criticized the first statement for not condemning the Israeli government, and several responded with “Free Palestine” comments. The second statement received nearly 200 comments, many of them critical of the pledge to support Gazans. “Are you also pleading that the Israeli hostages be released? Are you helping both the plight of innocent Israelis and Palestinians? Please say YES!,” one Instagram user wrote. Another user wrote that Ford Foundation and Ford Motor Company founder Henry Ford “was, of course, notably and virulently anti-Jewish. Did I miss a mention of Israel in this message?” The Ford Foundation has said before that it “deeply regrets” Henry Ford’s legacy. And Walker acknowledged that again in his most recent statement issued Sunday. He also expressed concerns for both Israelis and Palestinians affected by the war as well as “the vile resurgence of antisemitism and the many victims of Islamophobia.” Some “have cautioned that I — and the institution I lead — would be well advised to stay silent and stand pat.” However, because of the Ford Foundation’s history, Walker said he felt obligated to engage “no matter the complications or the consequences.” Why silence is harmful The backlash Walker experienced illustrates why some funders may be staying silent. But that also could be harmful, said Patricia McIlreavy, president and CEO of the Center for Disaster Philanthropy, which is based in the U.S. “To be honest, my biggest concern is that donors don’t lean in, that they are so concerned over being perceived as on a side or on the wrong side, whichever it may be, that they don’t stand up,” she told Devex. CDP issued its own statement on Oct. 11 urging funders to “make choices in their giving that center humanity and seek to help those with the greatest unmet needs.” The goal of the statement was to acknowledge the hurt that many are feeling and highlight the role that philanthropy can play in both Israel and Gaza, she said. CDP provides philanthropic advisory services and also operates multiple funds for domestic and international disaster relief. On Thursday, it established a relief and recovery fund for Israel and Gaza. CDP wants to be an avenue for funders who are more interested in addressing unmet humanitarian needs than the politics of the crisis, according to McIlreavy. “There will be donors who want to make a stand, who want to choose a side in this war. And I’m not judging them,” she said. “We’re just saying for us, we don’t feel that’s where we add the most value to the organizations we are seeking to serve.” Some also question the value of public statements in the face of crises such as the Israel-Hamas war. To what end is a statement from a philanthropy organization useful in the context of policy decisions such as the Israeli government’s use of force or Hamas’ attacks on civilians, asked Alexandra Toma, executive director of the Peace and Security Funders Group, or PSFG, a philanthropy network. She noted that many of philanthropy’s statements about diversity, equity, and inclusion following George Floyd’s murder in 2020 didn’t amount to much because they weren’t followed by significant investments in those areas. This is a time when the focus should be on the work and not what people are saying, Toma said. Most funders who have been consistently funding peace, security, and human rights work in the region are simply hunkering down and doing that work, she said. PSFG members who have been funding peace and security work in Israel and Gaza include the Global Fund for Women, Open Society Foundations, Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and Urgent Action Fund. The Ford Foundation also is a PSFG member. PSFG had an Israel-Palestine working group, but the membership eventually dwindled because it’s such a “lightning rod” issue and people were afraid of saying things that would be misinterpreted as antisemitic, anti-Muslim, or anti-Arab, Toma said. Still, the remaining members keep in touch and are trying to let those in the PSFG ecosystem know that they have existing relationships on the ground to deliver assistance, she said. “I think statements are nice and make you feel good,” Toma said. “But what I am most focused on is action.”