GHF Aid Distribution Suspended - Deadly Incidents at Gaza Centers
Bodies of two deceased Israelis recovered from the Gaza Strip; humanitarian centers continue to function - Israeli Aid Centers Remain Shut Down - Two Deceased Israelis Retrieved from Gaza Strip
The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a US- and Israeli-funded charity, began its operations in the Gaza Strip in May 2025, aiming to divert aid from Hamas-controlled channels. However, on June 6, the foundation announced it was closing all distribution centers following a series of violent incidents at the sites.
Chaos and Violence at Distribution Centers
The GHF cited multiple reasons for the suspension of operations, including chaotic and violent scenes at distribution centers. On June 3, Israeli troops reportedly fired shots at civilians waiting for food, killing at least 27 people [1][2]. Earlier, on May 30, similar incidents led to the deaths of 35 people, and on May 29, 20 people were killed in similar circumstances. These events raised concerns about the safety of both aid workers and recipients.
Threats from Hamas
In addition to the violence at the sites, the GHF accused Hamas of creating obstacles for aid distribution. They claimed Hamas threatened staff, diverted aid routes, and intentionally caused chaos at the centers [3][4].
Unfavorable Conditions
Several distribution centers were forced to close prematurely due to unruly crowds and reported violence [4].
International Concerns
The GHF’s model, run by US contractors and secured by private US-owned security firms, with the Israeli army providing perimeter protection, has been heavily criticized for compromising neutrality and endangering those involved in the aid process [4]. Furthermore, the UN reported that Gazans were consuming only 67% of what a human body needs to survive [1]. Volker Türk, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, deplored the situation, stating Palestinians were facing a choice between starvation or risking their lives to access food through Israel's militarized humanitarian assistance mechanism [1].
The US was also criticized for vetoing a UN Security Council resolution calling for an "unconditional and permanent" ceasefire in Gaza [1].
International Response
Critics have labeled the GHF’s approach as a "grotesque theatre of cruelty," breaching humanitarian principles and causing confusion [1]. Accusations of propaganda and misinformation were leveled at media outlets, including the BBC, for reporting Hamas's version of events regarding violence at aid sites without question [4]. In response to the situation, the UK government pledged an additional £4 million in funding to support the British Red Cross and its partner, the Palestinian Red Crescent, for humanitarian relief in Gaza [4].
| Issue | Details ||----------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|| Reasons for Closure | Chaos, violence, threats from Hamas, dangerous conditions || UN Cooperation | Criticism of militarized aid, lack of traditional neutrality, concerns over safety || International Response | Criticism of model, US veto at UN, UK funds to alternative aid channels, media controversies |
The GHF's aid distribution in Gaza remains a contentious issue, with humanitarian, political, and security concerns lingering.
The European Union has expressed concerns about the safety of aid workers and recipients in the Gaza Strip amidst reports of violent incidents at the GHF distribution centers, some of which involve war-and-conflicts and crime-and-justice. The ongoing negotiations on the agreement on the conclusion of the agreement on the conclusion of the agreement on the conclusion of the agreement on the conclusion of the agreement in the realm of general-news aim to address these issues and secure a more peaceful and just distribution of humanitarian aid.
The volatile political climate in the region, where the Hamas regime continues to create obstacles for aid distribution, complicates the process and raises questions about neutrality and the protection of those involved in the aid process. Remote video monitoring, investigation teams, and fact-finding missions may prove useful in addressing these concerns and ensuring the safety of all parties involved.
