130 Charities Demand Immediate Shutdown of Controversial US-Israeli Backed Gaza

A fierce storm of controversy has engulfed the Gaza Strip's humanitarian efforts, as a coalition of over 130 international charities and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have issued an urgent and unequivocal demand for the immediate cessation of operations by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF). This US- and Israeli-backed aid group, which commenced its work in late May following a three-month Israeli blockade, is accused by the charities of facilitating attacks on starving Palestinians and fundamentally violating core humanitarian principles. The joint statement, released by prominent organizations including Oxfam, Save the Children, Amnesty International, and Médecins Sans Frontières, paints a grim picture of a humanitarian response gone catastrophically wrong, leading to hundreds of deaths and thousands of injuries among those desperately seeking aid.
The core of the charities' condemnation lies in the staggering human cost associated with the GHF's operational model. Since its inception, more than 500 Palestinians have reportedly been killed and nearly 4,000 wounded while attempting to access aid distributed through GHF sites. The NGOs assert that Israeli forces and armed groups are "routinely" opening fire on Palestinians seeking aid, turning the designated distribution zones into "overcrowded, militarized areas" where civilians face "daily gunfire and mass casualties." Eyewitness accounts, medical reports, and even the Hamas-run health ministry in Gaza have consistently reported on these fatal incidents. The charities highlight the tragic reality that children and their caregivers are disproportionately affected, with minors injured in over half of the documented attacks on these aid distribution sites. With Gaza's already decimated healthcare system struggling to cope, many of those shot are left to bleed out, unable to access urgent medical care.
The fundamental objection raised by the 130-plus organizations is that the GHF's approach is "not a humanitarian response." They argue that it violates all norms of humanitarian work by replacing a system of over 400 localized aid distribution points, which operated during a temporary ceasefire, with just four centralized, military-controlled sites. These sites, three in the far southwest of Gaza and one in central Gaza, force the territory's 2.2 million residents to embark on perilous journeys through active conflict zones, often while weakened by starvation, only to face a chaotic and violent scramble for limited supplies. The UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, among others, has condemned this system as "inherently unsafe" and warned that it would "militarize" aid, bypass existing distribution networks, and compel Gazans into dangerous travel.
The charities further allege that the GHF is a "deadly, military-controlled alternative" that neither protects civilians nor meets basic needs, and that the Israeli government's ongoing blockade and restrictions are "deliberately and systematically dismantling" the humanitarian system in Gaza in favor of this problematic model. Palestinian civil society leaders have echoed these concerns, stating that the GHF is not providing sufficient supplies, with distributions often consisting of meager portions barely enough to last a few days, risking deeper malnutrition across the Strip.
The very establishment of the GHF has been steeped in controversy since its announcement. It was created amid escalating international pressure on Israel and its closest ally, the US, to alleviate the humanitarian crisis brought on by months of blockade. The GHF's leadership and funding have remained largely opaque, though it is understood to be led by former US intelligence officers and military veterans, operating with logistical and security support from Israel. The US recently authorized $30 million in direct funding to the GHF, a decision that drew immediate condemnation from organizations like Oxfam America, which labeled it a "multimillion-dollar distraction from the actual causes – and solutions – of Gaza's humanitarian crisis."
Israel, for its part, has defended the GHF system, arguing that it provides direct assistance to those in need and bypasses potential interference from Hamas, which it accuses of diverting aid. The Israeli military has denied deliberately firing at aid recipients, stating that it fires warning shots and sometimes targets "suspects" who ignore warnings. They have also indicated efforts to reorganize access to the GHF sites with new fencing and signage to improve operational response. However, these explanations have been largely dismissed by the coalition of charities, who maintain that the GHF's very structure and implementation create a deathtrap for desperate civilians.
The current situation represents a profound breakdown in the principles of neutrality, independence, and humanity that underpin international aid work. Aid organizations, including UN agencies, have largely refused to work with the GHF, citing its coordination with a warring party and its use of armed private contractors, which they argue violates fundamental humanitarian tenets. The call from over 130 charities for the GHF's shutdown is a powerful collective statement that the current approach is untenable and that a return to a UN-led, truly neutral and independent aid distribution system, coupled with a lifting of the blockade, is the only way to genuinely address the catastrophic humanitarian crisis in Gaza. The demand is clear: an immediate end to the "deadly Israeli distribution scheme" and a reinstatement of aid coordinated through established, principled mechanisms, along with a complete lifting of the Israeli government's blockade on aid and commercial supplies. The lives of millions of Palestinians hang in the balance.
Source@BBC