A full-page advertisement in the September 27 issue of a major Canadian newspaper, sponsored by Médecins sans Frontières (MSF), opens with a stark message: "Doctors can’t stop genocide: World leaders can." The ad urges readers to support a petition calling on the Canadian government to uphold international humanitarian law. It highlights the suffering of civilians in Gaza amid the ongoing conflict between Hamas and Israel, emphasizing issues like hunger. However, it does not mention Hamas or the aid that has reportedly been diverted by the group. Critics argue that the ad implies Israel is committing genocide, a claim they contest, stating that genocide requires intent, which they believe is not present in Israel's military actions. They assert that Hamas's actions on October 7 demonstrate a clear intent to harm.

The ad has drawn scrutiny for its lack of objectivity. Some observers believe that MSF, originally founded as a humanitarian organization, has become politicized and biased. They point to MSF's previous statements regarding Hamas's presence in Gaza hospitals, which the organization claimed it had no evidence of, and its admission of funding the Hamas-run Gaza Ministry of Health after the October 7 attacks.

The term "non-governmental organization" typically refers to groups that operate independently of government influence, providing expertise and humanitarian aid. However, critics argue that some NGOs, including MSF, have shifted from their original missions. They claim that these organizations have been taken over by activists with political agendas, particularly those critical of Israel. This shift has led to a perception that these NGOs are no longer neutral and have become vehicles for political influence.

Professor Gerald Steinberg, founder and president of NGO Monitor, has commented on the situation. His organization has published reports on various NGOs, highlighting their substantial budgets and the lack of regulatory oversight they face. For instance, MSF's annual income is approximately 2.4 billion euros (about C$3.9 billion), while Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have budgets of 370 million euros (C$605 million) and 111 million euros (C$150 million), respectively. Steinberg notes that this financial power allows these organizations to wield significant political influence and evade criticism.

The International Committee of the Red Cross has also faced similar accusations of bias. Its claim of neutrality has been challenged by critics who argue that it has failed to adequately address issues related to Hamas's actions against Israel. As the debate continues, the role of NGOs in conflict zones remains a contentious topic, with calls for greater accountability and transparency in their operations and reporting.