'Dangerous and destructive': The US-backed Gaza aid plan undermines humanitarian standards, aligns with Israeli goals of Palestinian displacement and reduces Gazan society to beggars
Humanitarian experts raise serious concerns about Washington’s proposed Gaza aid mechanism & how it entrenches Israel’s objectives of Palestinian displacement
Analysts and humanitarian experts are raising serious concerns about Washington’s newly proposed aid mechanism for Gaza, warning that it goes far beyond standard humanitarian frameworks and may, in fact, further entrench Israel’s strategic objective of displacing Palestinians.
The plan risks turning Gaza into a society sustained solely by emergency aid, with no means for recovery or sustainable living. They describe the initiative not as a neutral relief effort, but as a political instrument, closely mirroring, if not outright supporting, Israeli policy.
Meanwhile, the humanitarian situation in Gaza continues to deteriorate rapidly. The United Nations has warned that the territory is teetering on the brink of famine.
For months, Israel has maintained a tight blockade, severely limiting the entry of essential supplies. This comes as the Israeli government prepares to escalate its military operations against Hamas following the collapse of a ceasefire agreement in March.
Gaza famine
The New Arab (From the Arabic Edition)
The operational structure, which bypasses the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), is being seen as part of a broader campaign by both the US and Israel to dismantle the agency, which for decades has been central to humanitarian operations in Gaza.
While some observers believe the plan may be implemented, driven by the looming spectre of famine that leaves Palestinians with few alternatives, others anticipate serious obstacles.
These include a lack of funding, the high operational cost and complexity, and the likelihood of Israeli military interference. Critics also underscore the plan’s deviation from humanitarian norms, citing the absence of key protections and logistical safeguards.
The Trump administration announced in mid-May the creation of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a private new entity tasked with delivering humanitarian aid to the enclave.
Through its channels, aid will be delivered through private security firms operating under Israeli military protection, with distribution points established initially in the northern and southern regions of Gaza.
The plan, according to early details, centres on four aid distribution hubs. These hubs will initially provide food, clean water, and hygiene supplies to approximately 1.2 million people, covering just under 60 percent of the enclave’s population, but have the eventual goal of expanding the operation to reach the entire population of Gaza.
The sites themselves will be secured by private contractors and monitored by Israeli forces, with recipients subject to digital security screenings.
A controversial development
Amjad Shawa, the director of the Palestinian NGO Network in Gaza, warns that the plan excludes the private sector from any recovery efforts and falls dramatically short of meeting the scale of Gaza’s needs.
"It offers only a fraction of what’s required in this catastrophe," he said, pointing to the lack of guarantees against arrest, violence, or inhumane treatment at distribution points.
Amjad describes the plan as effectively forcing displacement as it will drive people from the north to the south in search of food, effectively instituting “coerced population movement,” and it focuses only on food and hygiene, completely ignoring water, healthcare, shelter, and other essential services.
He adds that the aid mechanism does not just fail to alleviate the crisis, it risks institutionalising it.
“Rather than lifting the siege or stopping the war, it maintains and deepens the disaster while enhancing Israeli control over the humanitarian space,” Amjad tells The New Arab.
The most alarming aspect for many, however, is the plan’s deliberate exclusion of UNRWA.
"UNRWA has been the backbone of Gaza’s humanitarian infrastructure," Amjad continued. "This is a direct attempt to erase not only a vital service provider, but a symbol of the Palestinian refugee issue."
While Amjad welcomed the refusal of the United Nations and various NGOs to participate in the plan, he stressed that its success or failure ultimately hinges on international response.
“If the global community refuses to fund it, if it insists on upholding humanitarian norms, the plan can fail,” he said.
“Open the crossings for aid under the current system. Stop the war. Anything else will only perpetuate this catastrophe and deepen the suffering of Gaza’s people.”
Ismat Mansour, an expert on Israeli affairs, told The New Arab that the areas designated for aid “are entirely under Israeli military control,” adding that Palestinians receiving aid will be subjected to security screenings and Israeli-imposed conditions that effectively “weaponise assistance,” turning food into leverage.
“The plan is dangerous and destructive,” he said, alleging that part of its purpose is to provide humanitarian cover for further Israeli military operations, while easing global criticism over Israel’s role in exacerbating famine in Gaza.
“Displacement is a core goal of the Israeli governing coalition and one backed by figures like the United States president,” he said.
“While Trump may have stopped speaking openly about it, the strategy remains. Gathering Palestinians into designated zones under direct Israeli control only increases the likelihood of mass displacement.”
He also argued that because Israel, with American backing, dominates the situation on the ground, alternative voices or opposition to the plan may prove irrelevant.
“No one will say no to aid, regardless of the criticism. And no one has the power to stop this or prevent the displacement, which is the real goal,” he explained.
While far-right elements within the Israeli government, such as Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, publicly oppose the entry of humanitarian aid, Ismat said they overlook these concerns in favour of the plan’s broader benefits: increased control over Gaza and the strategic removal of its population.
“This is part of a calculated American effort to restructure Gaza through the weaponisation of aid,” political analyst Mohammad Diab said.
“The approach is aligned with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s vision for the territory.”
Unlike past initiatives, such as the floating aid dock off Gaza, which failed to materialise, Mohammad believes this plan is both serious and operational.
“A foundation has already been established, leadership appointed, and full coordination with Israel achieved. This isn’t just a symbolic gesture. It’s a sustained strategy,” he added.
He also noted that while some modifications to the mechanism might occur following dialogue with Arab states, the plan’s core features, which include strict aid management and the prevention of any assistance reaching Hamas, will remain intact.
“Even if changes are made, the structure won’t be compromised. The American administration is being pragmatic, but as famine intensifies, political considerations will fall away and the plan will become a de facto necessity for both the population and official actors,” he told The New Arab.
“Starvation,” he added, “is a tool. The US wants to reengineer Gaza politically, economically, and socially. Even if a temporary ceasefire is reached, aid will still be funnelled through Israel’s strict conditions under this American framework.”
Unsustainable effort
However, political commentator Khalil Abu Shammala offered a sharply divergent view, predicting that the plan is likely to face significant implementation challenges.
He cited prohibitive costs, logistical complexity, and the probable refusal of international donors to finance an initiative that violates established humanitarian standards.
“This plan will require thousands of workers, massive logistical operations, and billions in funding. It’s not something a hastily formed foundation can manage,” Khalil said, warning that many governments and international organisations are “unwilling to engage with a system that incorporates security vetting and effectively segregates Palestinians into isolated zones under full Israeli control.”
Khalil further questioned the sustainability of the plan given the unpredictability of Israeli military policy.
“Israel can shut down crossings at any moment. That uncertainty makes long-term aid delivery untenable,” he said.
While acknowledging the alignment between the US aid mechanism and Israel’s strategic aims, including the use of food as leverage to facilitate displacement, Khalil expressed grave concern about the broader societal consequences.
“The plan reduces every segment of Gazan society to beggars wholly dependent on aid. It annihilates any hope of restoring Gaza’s civil, economic, and governmental institutions, from education and healthcare to reconstruction and social fabric,” he warned.
One of the clearest goals and likely outcomes of the plan, according to Khalil, is the displacement of Palestinians. He also questioned the sustainability of such an approach, asking how long people can “realistically survive on aid — what kind of future can be built under such conditions?"
He continued, “Is Gaza’s problem about securing food from donors? Of course not. What Gaza needs is an end to the war, an Israeli withdrawal, and the chance for its people to rebuild their lives with their own hands. They’ve done it before, and they can do it again if given the opportunity.”
Khalil contends that the real aim of the proposed aid plan is to concentrate Palestinians in isolated zones, paving the way for eventual mass displacement.
While the plan has been widely rejected by UN agencies, Palestinian factions, and official institutions, he expressed little optimism about their ability to block its implementation.
“None of these entities can stop it,” he said. “The mechanism already in place, relying on UN institutions and their local partners, is being sidelined.”
What could ultimately drive public acceptance of the plan, he feared, is not political endorsement but sheer desperation.
“Hunger is a brutal force,” he said. “It will push people to accept whatever is offered, however flawed. No organisation, no government, no faction can stand in the way of basic survival.
"That’s precisely the point of Israel’s deliberate policy of starvation, to reach a stage where the population is too desperate to resist.”
Mohamed Solaimane is a Gaza-based journalist with bylines in regional and international outlets, focusing on humanitarian and environmental issues
This piece is published in collaboration with Egab