Israel has officially informed the United Nations that it is terminating its 1967 agreement with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). This development follows accusations from the Israeli government that UNRWA has connections with Hamas and other militant groups operating in Palestinian territories. The Israeli Knesset recently passed legislation prohibiting the UN agency’s activities within its borders. UNRWA was established in 1949 in response to the influx of Palestinian refugees resulting from the establishment of Israel and the subsequent Arab-Israeli conflict. Following the Six-Day War in 1967, Israel had initially requested the UNRWA to continue its work in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.
Israel’s Foreign Minister, Israel Katz, voiced strong criticism of UNRWA, claiming that it is contributing to the ongoing issues in Gaza rather than alleviating them. He emphasized that many UNRWA employees were allegedly involved in the recent October 7 attacks and accused the agency of being riddled with Hamas operatives. Katz argued that despite the Israeli government presenting the UN with substantial evidence of these claims, no significant action had been taken to address the alleged infiltration of the organization by militant groups. This stance reflects a broader Israeli sentiment that views UNRWA as complicit in the ongoing violence and instability in the region.
In response to these allegations, UNRWA has maintained its innocence, asserting that it takes necessary steps to preserve its neutrality and efficacy in humanitarian efforts. Earlier in August, the agency terminated the contracts of nine employees due to their potential involvement in hostilities, though it later found insufficient evidence against ten other individuals. The Israeli government’s decision to restrict UNRWA’s operations, however, has drawn international condemnation. Key countries such as Canada, Australia, France, Germany, Japan, South Korea, and the United Kingdom have voiced their concerns, urging Israel to reconsider its actions and expressing alarm regarding the dire humanitarian conditions prevalent in Gaza.
Despite the calls for restraint, Katz has underlined that Israel is proceeding with the ban due to perceived flaws within UNRWA. He highlighted that alternative channels are available for delivering humanitarian aid and noted that UNRWA handles only a small fraction—13%—of the total aid reaching Gaza. Katz affirmed Israel’s commitment to international law, pledging to facilitate humanitarian assistance to the region without compromising the safety of its citizens. This assertion signifies a reshaping of Israel’s approach towards humanitarian aid, focusing less on UNRWA and suggesting a pivot towards collaboration with other organizations.
UNRWA spokesperson Jonathan Fowler has countered the Israeli ban, warning that its enforcement would likely lead to a collapse of crucial humanitarian operations in Gaza. The agency plays a pivotal role in providing a range of services, including education, health care, and emergency shelter administration, which are vital to the wellbeing of the trapped Palestinian population. Concerns are also mounting as the World Food Programme has issued warnings of a potential famine due to the precarious situation in Gaza, stating that it cannot fulfill the same roles as UNRWA. These warnings underpin the necessity of UNRWA’s operations as they form a lifeline for many in desperate need.
As the situation in Gaza continues to deteriorate amid escalating tensions between Israel and Palestinian militant groups, the international community is grappling with how to respond effectively. The dismissal of UNRWA by the Israeli government not only complicates existing humanitarian efforts but also risks exacerbating an already fragile situation for millions of Palestinians reliant on the agency for basic necessities. The implications of Israel’s decision stretch far beyond its borders, involving intricate dynamics of regional stability, humanitarian needs, and international diplomatic relations, leading to calls for urgent solutions in addressing the humanitarian crisis while navigating the complexities of security concerns linked to militancy.
