Since the outbreak of the war between Hamas and Israel in 2023, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza has been the focal point of international attention. Aid organizations, both longstanding and newly formed, have rushed to provide critical support to the Palestinian population, which has been under constant bombardment and siege. Amidst this crisis, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), backed by the U.S. and Israel, has emerged as a contentious yet significant voice. While the U.N. and other NGOs have criticized GHF, analysts argue that its operations are fundamentally altering the power dynamics in Gaza.
Joe Truzman, an analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, has highlighted the growing role of GHF in undermining Hamas’ ability to control the distribution of aid. Truzman argues that Hamas has traditionally relied on its control over aid to maintain influence over the population, using a system of schools, mosques, and charitable networks to feed and sustain its support. However, GHF’s direct approach to delivering food to families is cutting through this system, thereby reducing Hamas’ capacity to maintain its grip on the population. According to Truzman, the success of GHF is not just a humanitarian achievement but a significant shift in the balance of power in Gaza. He suggests that Hamas is reacting to this shift, signaling that it is losing a key tool in its strategy to maintain authority over the region.
The U.S. has actively supported GHF, viewing it as a necessary alternative to traditional aid mechanisms that have been compromised by the ongoing conflict. In June, the U.S. announced $30 million in funding for GHF, citing its effectiveness in delivering aid while preventing Hamas from looting it. State Department officials have emphasized the importance of this initiative in ensuring that aid reaches the right people without falling into the hands of terrorist groups. However, this support has sparked criticism from international bodies, including the U.N. and some NGOs, which have accused GHF of being a tool of U.S. foreign policy. The U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) has expressed support for GHF’s efforts, emphasizing the urgency of ending the humanitarian crisis in Gaza after over 21 months of conflict.
Despite the criticism, GHF continues to expand its operations, having already delivered over 76 million meals to Palestinians since it began operations in late May. Its approach, which involves delivering aid directly to families rather than relying on institutional networks, has drawn both praise and scrutiny. Some argue that this model is more efficient and less susceptible to corruption, while others believe it undermines the traditional aid systems that have been in place for decades. The conflict over GHF’s role reflects a broader debate over the role of aid in conflict zones and the extent to which external actors can influence the provision of humanitarian support without compromising the independence of aid organizations.
The situation in Gaza remains a focal point for international attention, with the U.N. and other organizations vying for influence over the management of aid. While GHF represents a new approach to humanitarian relief, its effectiveness and legitimacy are still being tested. The ongoing conflict and the evolving dynamics among aid groups, international organizations, and local actors underscore the complexity of delivering aid in a war-torn region. As the humanitarian crisis persists, the role of organizations like GHF will continue to be a topic of intense debate and scrutiny.