INTERVIEW: Time's Being Wasted On Politics Of Aid While Deaths Mount In Gaza, Warns Senior Official

The UN already has a proven system to deliver assistance to people in Gaza and will not take part in any plan that does not uphold universally established humanitarian principles, a spokesperson for aid coordination office OCHA affirmed on Friday.
' There's been so much time wasted talking about the various proposals and the various plans. In the meantime, people are dying and are left without aid,' Olga Cherevko said in an exclusive interview with UN News.
This week, UN agencies were able to bring limited amounts of food, flour and other items into Gaza after Israel lifted a nearly three-month aid blockade.
Ms. Cherevko said humanitarians were told this was a temporary measure until aid distribution is implemented through the so-called Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, an initiative backed by Israel and the United States.
The plan sees aid dispersed from four points south of the Netzarim Corridor, which is under Israeli military control, and involves the use of private US contractors.
She discussed this development, the positive impact of the trickle of aid allowed into Gaza, and the need to scale up efforts.
' There is a sense that some people feel like this is the end and that there is no turning back – and that they are just waiting to die,' she said.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity
Olga Cherevko: We've been speaking about this and other proposals and plans. Our concerns are that any distribution of aid, any system that exists, needs to be in line with globally established humanitarian principles. And if it isn't, it's not something that we can be involved in.
We have concerns about the scalability of this proposed plan, and about various other parts of it.
The biggest issue is that we have a plan, and we have a system that we are using as we speak, and the system has been tried over various crises across the world. It has been proven to work, it has mechanisms to mitigate theft, to mitigate diversion and it ensures that it reaches people wherever they are.
So, there's been so much time wasted talking about the various proposals and the various plans. In the meantime, people are dying and are left without aid.
The volume of aid is literally a drop in the ocean of what is needed
UN News: The UN definitely will not be taking part in this plan, but did you receive any indications that you will be able to proceed with the work that you've been doing over the past couple of days?
Olga Cherevko: For the time being it's unclear because obviously the resumption of limited volumes of aid entering that the Israeli authorities have approved as of a few days ago, we were obviously assured that we would be using our mechanisms – so the ones that we're using now, the ones that are already in place.
We were informed that this would be an interim measure until this Foundation starts working. At this point, we really don't have more details and again, it will have to be seen on the ground how things will develop.
UN News: Were any trucks allowed in today and was more aid distributed?
Olga Cherevko: There have been batches of trucks coming in since this decision to allow them was approved. We have already been able to get some of the aid to the people in need, including getting flour to bakeries, and a number of bakeries have resumed their operations and fired up their ovens.
We also had some partners who picked up the bread for direct distribution. A field hospital also received a batch of medical supplies.
These are obviously very positive steps and positive developments in the right direction, but the volume of this aid is literally a drop in the ocean compared to the extent of needs on the ground.
UN News: We heard that most, if not all, of the supplies that were allowed in yesterday were nutritional and food aid. Is this a new development that some medical supplies were allowed in today? How many people can be served with these food items and medical supplies?
Olga Cherevko: The medical supplies were always part of the agreement to be included. But again, this is something that in itself is limiting because at the moment what is being allowed is things like nutrition, flour, some medicines and a few other things. It has to be a full range of things for us to be able to really deliver assistance at scale.
In terms of how many people it will serve, you can compare the kind of volumes that we were having during the ceasefire to what we have now and you will see that it's woefully insufficient. But we have enough food alone to feed people for several months waiting at the crossings.
UN News: The World Food Programme (WFP) said 15 of its trucks were looted. Can you tell us what's being done to prevent looting?
Olga Cherevko: Regarding looting and break-ins or whatever to try to divert or take aid – if you look at the numbers of these kinds of incidents before the ceasefire and during the ceasefire you will see a huge change.
There were barely any such incidents during the weeks of the ceasefire when we were able to bring in these large volumes (of aid).
When the ceasefire broke down and the crossings were closed for the entry of any cargo, and we got to the point where we were really in a desperate situation and we were running low on everything, that is when they started again.
UN News: Let's go back to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. As the four distribution points are going to be south of the Netzarim Corridor– reportedly one in Middle Gaza and the others in the south – are you already starting to see movements towards those areas? What are your concerns about displacement?
People are sleeping in the streets because there's nowhere for them to go
Olga Cherevko: Our concerns about displacement are what they have always been. Obviously, we would never support any sort of forced displacement, or any type of ethnic cleansing, or anything that would forcibly drive people from the areas where they are.
Before the ceasefire, more than 90 per cent of people were forcibly displaced across Gaza and they were being squeezed into an increasingly smaller piece of land. When the ceasefire happened a lot of them went back.
They tried to restart their lives and they kind of had a bit of time to process what's been happening. When the ceasefire broke down again on 18 March, we saw another 610,000 people displaced again. These types of displacement are getting more and more dangerous and desperate because people are coming with nothing. People are fleeing with just the shirt on their back.
We're now hearing and seeing people sleeping in the streets because there's nowhere for them to go. As we've said time and time again, there is no safe place in Gaza, and this has been proven time and time again.
UN News: You've been back and forth to Gaza for quite some time now, and you've seen the suffering first-hand. Can you give our audience an idea of what it means in real-life terms when aid is prevented from reaching those in need?
Olga Cherevko: Something that has always stuck me about the Palestinians in Gaza is their resilience and their strength, and the spirit that they have kept throughout these months of war.
I knew Gaza well before because I used to work there for several years starting from 2014, and knowing how people have endured so much suffering and despite that they find the strength to go, they find the strength to smile at you and to offer you tea or anything that they might still have.
Now when I speak to people, the thing that is most devastating is that there is a sense that some people feel like this is the end and that there is no turning back and that they are just waiting to die.
Before this limited aid was allowed to enter, the remaining operating community kitchens would have hundreds of people huddled around them waiting for hours with empty pots.
Many were told to turn back because there's no food for them. People were telling me that they weren't eating for several days at a time. I saw children that are being malnourished, and suffering from malnutrition.
These kinds of things are very preventable, and preventable deaths are happening all around us because of this intentional crisis imposed on Gaza by closing the crossings.
And that is the most frustrating thing for me – knowing that we can quickly address these issues if only we were given the opportunity – because we have everything waiting outside of Gaza to come in.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

NZ Herald

40 minutes ago

• NZ Herald

Destiny Church's Brian Tamaki protests against foreign religions in NZ

Destiny Church leader Brian Tamaki is leading a march down Queen St, claiming 'the spread of non-Christian religions is now out of control' in New Zealand. The march started at 12pm in Aotea Square on Queen St. Story continues after live blog Load more Story continues 'It's time to take aim and launch a full assault - exposing Islam, the UN, and every foreign religion and ideology hijacking our country,' Tamaki claimed earlier in a press release. In November last year, Tamaki led a 'Make New Zealand Great Again' rally from Waikato to Auckland. Tamaki was condemned by the Prime Minister when his Destiny Church groups Man Up and Legacy stormed a children's library event in February last year. Jaime Lyth is a multimedia journalist for the New Zealand Herald, focusing on crime and breaking news. Lyth began working under the NZ Herald masthead in 2021 as a reporter for the Northern Advocate in Whangārei.

Otago Daily Times

3 hours ago

• Otago Daily Times

'She's wrong': Trump contradicts spy boss on Iran nuclear programme

US President Donald Trump said on Friday (local time) that his Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was wrong in suggesting there was no evidence Iran is building a nuclear weapon. Trump contested intelligence assessments relayed earlier this year by his spy chief that Tehran was not building a nuclear weapon when he spoke with reporters at an airport in Morristown, New Jersey. "She's wrong," Trump said. In March, Gabbard testified to Congress that the US intelligence community continued to believe that Tehran was not building a nuclear weapon. "The (intelligence community) continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon," she said. On Friday, Gabbard said in a post on the social media platform X that: "America has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months, if they decide to finalize the assembly. President Trump has been clear that can't happen, and I agree." She said the media had taken her March testimony "out of context" and was trying to "manufacture division." The White House has said Trump will weigh involvement in the Iran-Israel conflict over the next two weeks. On Tuesday, Trump made similar comments to reporters about Gabbard's assessment. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has justified a week of airstrikes on Iranian nuclear and military targets by saying Tehran was on the verge of having a warhead. Iran denies developing nuclear weapons, saying its uranium enrichment programme is only for peaceful purposes. In March, Gabbard described Iran's enriched uranium stockpile as unprecedented for a state without such weapons and said the government was watching the situation closely. She also said that Iran had started discussing nuclear weapons in public, "emboldening nuclear weapons advocates within Iran's decision-making apparatus." A source with access to US intelligence reports told Reuters that the assessment presented by Gabbard has not changed. They said US spy services also judged that it would take up to three years for Iran to build a warhead with which it could hit a target of its choice. Some experts, however, believe it could take Iran a much shorter time to build and deliver an untested crude nuclear device, although there would be no guarantee it would work. Trump has frequently disavowed the findings of US intelligence agencies, which he and his supporters have charged - without providing proof - are part of a "deep state" cabal of US officials opposed to his presidency. Gabbard, a fierce Trump loyalist, has been among the president's backers who have aired such allegations. The Republican president repeatedly clashed with US spy agencies during his first term, including over an assessment that Moscow worked to sway the 2016 presidential vote in his favour and his acceptance of Russian President Vladimir Putin's denials.

Newsroom

a day ago

• Newsroom

The Israel-Iran conflict may not end without a regime change

Analysis: The spiral of conflict in the Middle East took another dangerous turn when Israel, seemingly unprovoked, attacked Iran last Friday on an unprecedented scale, taking the region to the brink of full-scale war as Iran retaliates. The day before Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched the still ongoing war, he went to the Western Wall (or Wailing Wall) sacred to Jews and posted a note into a crack in the colossal stone blocks as per the ritual. The note quoted the biblical Book of Numbers: 'Behold, the people shall rise up as a great lion.' Hence the name Operation Rising Lion. When I visited Jerusalem in 2023, I made it into the tunnels behind and beneath the Western Wall and saw long forgotten and faded notes scattered on the ground. My guess is that the current trajectory in the Middle East will see Netanyahu's vision for Israeli power and security cast in the dirt also. For most, the main question now is whether there is any justification or tangible reason for Israel's pre-emptive attack against Iran's suspected nuclear weapons programme. My response would be that mutual perceptions of existential crisis in Israel and Iran is driving the region deeper into crisis. To understand this, one could adopt a lens of ontological security. This means the very identity and essence of the political systems in Israel and Iran are intrinsically tied to ideologically conditioned language and behaviours without which the regimes would deflate and crash to earth like punctured hot air balloons. According to this understanding, Israel and Iran have been on a collision course since the formerly close allies parted ways 45 years ago after the Iranian revolution. Let me explain. The raison d'être of the Israeli state is to protect its citizens above all – this is perhaps the one universal principle of an otherwise diverse and increasingly politically divided nation. The more that Israelis feel threatened, the more the state's identity becomes anchored to an inflexible security paradigm willing to compromise the lives and human security of others who are perceived as a 'threat', including Palestinians and those who support them. On the Iranian side, the Islamic Republic emerged out of a popular revolution against the repressive western-aligned Pahlavi monarchy. Again, like the State of Israel the Islamic Republic immediately faced attack and isolation, which led to regression into a narrow, paranoid oligarchy with a theocratic veneer. To offset flagging internal legitimacy, the regime exaggerated the Islamic character of the state by taking up the cause of Muslim justice abroad. The Palestinian issue and anti-Israel sentiment – manifested in the Axis of Resistance alliance – came to rest at the core of the Iranian regime's identity. A senior cleric of the ruling oligarchy expressed this reality perfectly in 2013 when he stated: 'The destruction of Israel is the idea of the Islamic Revolution in Iran and is one of the pillars of the Iranian Islamic regime. We cannot claim that we have no intention of going to war with Israel.' The two core paradigms of both states are mutually reinforcing – Iran props up its internal legitimacy by proclaiming a desire to destroy the Zionist state on behalf of Muslims, and Israel commits atrocities against Muslims in its search for security for Jews. Since the 2000s, the spectre of a nuclear-armed Iranian state amplified this cycle immensely. Israel has been planning to strike Iran's nuclear programme since at least 2007. At that time Israel embarrassed the Syrian regime and its Iranian ally by effortlessly evading air defences to destroy a nuclear research facility in Northeast Syria. The Israeli Defence Force then made clear its intention and capacity to do the same in Iran. What prevented Israel were Iran's regional assets, located on Israel's borders. If Israel were to attack Iran directly, they would have faced a barrage of missiles and rockets from resistance axis allies, Hamas and other militia in Gaza, and from Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. Syria also posed a possible threat from the Golan. This was the Iranian regime's outer defence rim and insurance policy. This changed after the October 7, 2023 attacks. By the end of 2024, Hamas and Hezbollah were no longer able to threaten Israel as before, the Al-Assad regime was gone and the path to Tehran and the Furdow, Netanz and other nuclear facilities were wide open. If US president Donald Trump had not restrained Netanyahu in the first months of 2025, the latter may have pulled the trigger on the attack even earlier. Trump, in consultation with Gulf allies during his May visit to the Middle East, which tellingly did not include Israel, was persuaded to leverage the vulnerable Iranian state into a more favourable nuclear deal. Talks were being facilitated by the neutral Omanis in Muscat. Trump had scotched the 2013-15 deal negotiated by Barak Obama, also hosted by Oman, in 2018. The latest round of talks were due to be held in Muscat on Sunday, June 15. The Iranians relaxed their security personal protocols put in place after the assassinations of top leaders via pinpoint strikes through 2024, believing that they were safe until at least after the talks. Netanyahu sensed the opportunity and his war cabinet ordered Operation Rising Lion. (Apart from a spike in pizza deliveries to the Pentagon on the day before the attacks it remains unclear how much knowedge the US had of the operation.) Where the current conflict will lead is not clear. At this point, it seems neither the Israelis nor the Iranians can change the script. The Israeli regime will act according to an ingrained impulse to destroy anything and anyone they think poses an existential risk to the State of Israel. The Islamic Republic will continue to fire back as much as they can with missiles and inflammatory rhetoric about the final destruction of Israel. It may be that only regime change in Tehran and Jerusalem via the Iranian and Israeli peoples can arrest the cycle.