Palestinians wary as US-backed aid group begins operations in Gaza
Palestinians inspect the damage at a school sheltering displaced people, following an Israeli strike, in Gaza City, May 26, 2025. REUTERS/Dawoud Abu Alkas
A Palestinian woman places a kettle over the fire outside her tent, where she took shelter after being displaced, in Gaza City May 26, 2025. REUTERS/Mahmoud Issa
Palestinians displaced by the Israeli military offensive take shelter in tents near Gaza's seaport, in Gaza City May 26, 2025. REUTERS/Mahmoud Issa
An Israeli tank stands on the Israel-Gaza border, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, in Israel, May 27, 2025 REUTERS/Amir Cohen
Smoke rises from North Gaza after an explosion, near the Israel-Gaza border as seen from Israel, May 27, 2025 REUTERS/Amir Cohen
Israeli military vehicles operate inside Gaza, near the Israel-Gaza border, as seen from Israel, May 27, 2025 REUTERS/Amir Cohen
A general view shows destruction in North Gaza, as seen from Israel, May 27, 2025 REUTERS/Amir Cohen
Military vehicles stands on the Israel-Gaza border, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, in Israel, May 27, 2025 REUTERS/Amir Cohen
Trucks transport aid as Gaza Humanitarian Foundation said it has commenced operations to begin distribution of aid, in Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip, May 26, 2025. Gaza Humanitarian Foundation/Handout via REUTERS/File Photo
CAIRO - Palestinians voiced wariness on Tuesday toward a U.S.-backed foundation set to bring aid to Gaza amid signs of famine, with Hamas warnings about biometric screening procedures keeping many away from distribution points.
The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation said it began operations on Monday, but there was little indication of Palestinians turning up at distribution centres in southern Gaza even after almost three months of Israel blockading the enclave.
Palestinians said there was no known visits to new sites of distribution on Monday, but on Tuesday dozens headed to one of them established in Rafah to get some aid despite the warnings, at least three witnesses told Reuters.
Others stayed away.
"As much as I want to go because I am hungry and my children are hungry, I am afraid," said Abu Ahmed, 55, a father of seven. "I am so scared because they said the company belongs to Israel and is a mercenary, and also because the resistance (Hamas) said not to go," he said in a message on the chat app WhatsApp.
Israel says the Switzerland-based GHF is a U.S.-backed initiative and that its forces will not be involved in the distribution points where food will be handed out.
But its endorsement of the plan, which resembles Israeli schemes floated previously, and its closeness with the U.S. has led many to question the neutrality of the foundation, including its own former chief, who resigned unexpectedly on Sunday.
The United Nations and other international aid groups have boycotted the foundation, which they say undermines the principle that humanitarian aid should be distributed independently of the parties to a conflict, based on need.
"Humanitarian assistance must not be politicised or militarised," said Christian Cardon, chief spokesperson of the International Committee of the Red Cross.
Israel, at war with Gaza's dominant Hamas militant group since October 2023, imposed the blockade in early March accusing Hamas of stealing supplies and using them to entrench its position. Hamas has denied such accusations.
Israeli officials said one of the advantages of the new aid system is the opportunity to screen recipients to exclude anyone found to be connected with Hamas.
Humanitarian groups briefed on the foundation's plans say anyone accessing aid will have to submit to facial recognition technology that many Palestinians fear will end up in Israeli hands to be used to track and potentially target them.
Details of exactly how the system will operate have not been made public.
Israel makes extensive use of facial recognition and other forms of biometric identification in the occupied West Bank and has been reported by Israeli and international media to be using such techniques in Gaza as well.
BEGGING FOR BREAD
Hamas, which has in recent months faced protests by many Palestinians who want the devastating war to end, has also warned residents against accessing GHF sites, saying Israel was using the company to collect intelligence information.
"Do not go to Rafah ...Do not fall into the trap...Do not risk your lives. Your homes are your fortress. Staying in your neighbourhoods is survival, and awareness is your protection," a statement published by the Hamas-linked Home Front said.
"These schemes will be broken by the steadfastness of a people who do not know defeat," it added.
The launch of the new system came days after Israel eased its blockade, allowing a trickle of aid trucks from international agencies into Gaza last week, including World Food Programme vehicles bringing flour to local bakeries.
But the amount of aid that has entered the densely populated coastal enclave has been only a small fraction of the 500-600 trucks that U.N. agencies estimate are needed every day.
"Before the war, my fridge used to be full of meat, chicken, dairy, soft drinks, everything, and now I am begging for a loaf of bread," Abu Ahmed told Reuters via a chat app.
As a small aid flow has resumed, Israeli forces - now in control of large parts of Gaza - have kept up attacks on various targets around the enclave, killing 3,901 Palestinians since a two-month-old ceasefire collapsed in mid-March, according to the Gaza health ministry.
In all, more than 54,000 Palestinians have been killed in Israel's air and ground war, launched following a cross-border Hamas-led attack on October 7, 2023 that killed some 1,200 people and saw 251 taken hostage into Gaza. REUTERS
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
20 minutes ago
- Straits Times
UK was informed ahead of US-Iran strike, no request for help-minister
FILE PHOTO: Britain's Secretary of State for Business and Trade Jonathan Reynolds arrives for a cabinet meeting at 10 Downing Street in London, Britain, June 11, 2025. REUTERS/Jaimi Joy/File Photo LONDON - Britain did not receive a U.S. request for its Diego Garcia base to be used in the U.S. strikes on Iran, but it was informed ahead of the attack, senior minister Jonathan Reynolds said on Sunday. Reynolds said Britain had moved military assets to the region and would take "all action necessary" to defend its key allies if they came under threat. He added that Prime Minister Keir Starmer was talking to allies on Sunday. "No request was made," the business and trade minister told Sky News. "I know often because of British military assets, RAF Akrotiri (in Cyprus) or Diego Garcia, sometimes that request is made. And this was not a situation where that request was made". Reynolds added that Britain had been informed of the strike. "I can't tell you exactly when we did know, but we were informed, as you might expect," he said. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Business Times
43 minutes ago
- Business Times
Strikes on Iran mark Trump's biggest, and riskiest, foreign policy gamble
[WASHINGTON] With his unprecedented decision to bomb Iran's nuclear sites, directly joining Israel's air attack on its regional arch foe, US President Donald Trump has done something that he had long vowed to avoid – intervene militarily in a major foreign war. The dramatic US strike, including the targeting of Iran's most heavily fortified nuclear installation deep underground, marks the biggest foreign policy gamble of Trump's two presidencies and one fraught with risks and unknowns. Trump, who insisted on Saturday (Jun 21) that Iran must now make peace or face further attacks, could provoke Teheran into retaliating by closing the Strait of Hormuz, the world's most important oil artery, attacking US military bases and allies in the Middle East, stepping up its missile barrage on Israel and activating proxy groups against American and Israeli interests worldwide, analysts said. Such moves could escalate into a broader, more protracted conflict than Trump had envisioned, evoking echoes of the 'forever wars' that America fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, which he had derided as 'stupid' and promised never to be dragged into. 'The Iranians are seriously weakened and degraded in their military capabilities,' said Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator for Democratic and Republican administrations. 'But they have all sorts of asymmetric ways that they can respond... This is not going to end quick.' In the lead-up to the bombing that he announced late on Saturday, Trump had vacillated between threats of military action and appeals for renewed negotiation to persuade Iran to reach a deal to dismantle its nuclear programme. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up A senior White House official said that once Trump was convinced that Teheran had no interest in reaching a nuclear agreement, he decided the strikes were 'the right thing to do'. Trump gave the go-ahead once he was assured of a 'high probability of success', the official said – a determination reached after more than a week of Israeli air attacks on Iran's nuclear and military facilities paved the way for the US to deliver the potentially crowning blow. Nuclear threat remains Trump touted the 'great success' of the strikes, which he said included the use of massive 'bunker-buster bombs' on the main site at Fordow. But some experts suggested that while Iran's nuclear programme may have been set back for many years, the threat may be far from over. Iran denies seeking a nuclear weapon, saying its programme is for purely peaceful purposes. 'In the long term, military action is likely to push Iran to determine nuclear weapons are necessary for deterrence and that Washington is not interested in diplomacy,' the Arms Control Association, a non-partisan US-based organisation that advocates for arms control legislation, said in a statement. 'Military strikes alone cannot destroy Iran's extensive nuclear knowledge. The strikes will set Iran's programme back, but at the cost of strengthening Teheran's resolve to reconstitute its sensitive nuclear activities,' the group said. Eric Lob, assistant professor in the Department of Politics and International Relations at Florida International University, said Iran's next move remains an open question and suggested that among its forms of retaliation could be to hit 'soft targets' of the US and Israel inside and outside the region. But he also said there was a possibility that Iran could return to the negotiating table – 'though they would be doing so in an even weaker position' – or seek a diplomatic off-ramp. In the immediate aftermath of the US strikes, however, Iran showed little appetite for concessions. Iran's Atomic Energy Organization said it would not allow development of its 'national industry' to be stopped, and an Iranian state television commentator said every US citizen or military member in the region would now be legitimate targets. Early on Sunday, Iran's foreign ministry issued a statement warning that Teheran 'considers it its right to resist with all its might against US military aggression'. Karim Sadjadpour, an analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, posted on X: 'Trump indicated this is now the time for peace. It's unclear and unlikely the Iranians will see it the same way. This is more likely to open a new chapter of the 46-year-old US-Iran war than conclude it.' Some analysts suggested that Trump, whose administration has previously disavowed any aim of dislodging the Iranian leadership, could be drawn into seeking 'regime change' if Teheran carries out major reprisals or moves to build a nuclear weapon. That, in turn, would bring additional risks. 'Beware mission creep, aiming for regime change and democratisation campaigns,' said Laura Blumenfeld, a Middle East analyst at the Johns Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies in Washington. 'You'll find the bones of many failed US moral missions buried in Middle East sands.' Jonathan Panikoff, a former US deputy intelligence officer for the Middle East, said Iran's leadership would quickly engage in 'disproportionate attacks' if it felt its survival was imperilled. But Teheran will also have to be mindful of the consequences, he said. While actions such as closing the Strait of Hormuz would pose problems for Trump with the resulting higher oil prices and potential US inflationary impact, it would also hurt China, one of Iran's few powerful allies. At the same time, Trump is already facing strong push-back from congressional Democrats against the Iran attack and will also have to contend with opposition from the anti-interventionist wing of his Republican Maga base. Trump, who faced no major international crisis in his first term, is now embroiled in one just six months into his second. Even if he hopes US military involvement can be limited in time and scope, the history of such conflicts often carries unintended consequences for American presidents. Trump's slogan of 'peace through strength' will certainly be tested as never before, especially with his opening of a new military front after failing to meet his campaign promises to quickly end wars in Ukraine and Gaza. 'Trump is back in the war business,' said Richard Gowan, UN director at the International Crisis Group. 'I am not sure anyone in Moscow, Teheran or Beijing ever believed his spiel that he is a peacemaker. It always looked more like a campaign phrase than a strategy.' REUTERS
Straits Times
an hour ago
- Straits Times
U.S. military facilities in the Middle East
FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump delivers remarks to U.S. troops, next to a banner reading, \"Peace Through Strength\", during a visit to Al Udeid Air Base in Doha, Qatar, May 15, 2025. REUTERS/Brian Snyder/File Photo U.S. forces struck Iran's three main nuclear sites on Sunday, after a week of Israeli strikes on Iranian targets, and Iran said it reserved all options to defend itself. Tehran had previously conveyed to Washington that it would respond firmly if the U.S. directly attacked Iran, and it has warned that U.S. assets in the region could be a target if it was attacked. The U.S., which has long had major military bases in the Gulf Arab States, moved some aircraft and ships last week that may be vulnerable to a potential Iranian attack and limited access to its largest installation, Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar. Below is a map of U.S. facilities in the region. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
