The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a U.S.- Israeli-backed initiative launched in early 2025, has fallen under intense scrutiny for allegedly militarizing humanitarian aid, violating the core principles of neutrality and serving geopolitical interests under the guise of relief.
Backed by the USA and Israel, the GHF began with promises of swift assistance for Gaza, one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises, and attempted to position itself as a more efficient alternative to the UN-led aid system, which has been serving Palestinians since the war broke out in October 2023.
Specifically, the foundation announced that its mandate was to deliver essential supplies to Gaza’s 2.3 million residents amid escalating hunger after Israel blocked supplies for three months.
Controversial humanitarian model
Israel and the USA promoted the GHF as a response to alleged aid diversion by the Palestinian armed group Hamas, claims that the UN has repeatedly stated lack credible evidence.
Unlike traditional humanitarian organizations, the leadership of the GHF is composed of retired military officers, private security contractors, and a handful of humanitarian professionals. It started to distribute aid on May 26 which is provided from four fortified centers in southern Gaza, all protected by private contractors and situated close to Israeli military bases.
Early distribution was marred by disorder. Videos from May 27 show crowds overwhelming trucks and tearing down barriers, with security guards fleeing as civilians surged forward, highlighting the dangers of militarized aid delivery in a war zone. One person was reported dead and 48 injured.
It has not gone unnoticed that none of the four aid distribution centers are located in the besieged northern Gaza, where hundreds of thousands of Palestinians remain cut off from aid.
In response to mounting criticism over this exclusion, the GHF has asked the Israeli military to identify and approve locations for secure distribution sites in the north, a process it hopes to complete within 30 days.
Humanitarian rebellion: Why aid groups reject GHF
Although humanitarian organizations both within the UN and outside it cooperate very closely on the ground to improve the response to crises, this time they announced a rare unified rejection, refusing to take part in the new aid distribution system being operated by the GHF in Gaza, arguing that it politicizes humanitarian relief.
“This distribution plan does not accord with our principles of impartiality, neutrality, and independence; we will not be participating,” said UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq on May 23. This marked a rare public refusal by the UN to engage in a major aid initiative.
CARE made its stance unequivocal, stating it “does not support, nor has it agreed to collaborate with GHF or any form of militarization of aid”.
Meanwhile, a joint statement from Action For Humanity, ActionAid, Christian Aid, and other groups labeled the GHF a “dangerous, politicized sham” that risks turning aid into a tool of control. The statement also warned that the military-adjacent model “erodes humanitarian space” and sidelines experienced local responders.
Politicization and displacement accusations
The Hamas-run interior ministry has publicly accused the GHF of encouraging the forced displacement of Palestinians under the guise of humanitarian aid.
It argued that by centralizing aid in heavily militarized zones in southern Gaza and excluding the besieged north, the model compels civilians to relocate, not by choice, but out of desperation.
This has triggered wider fears that the GHF’s framework may reflect a revival of the “voluntary migration” plan proposed during U.S. President Donald Trump’s previous administration, which advocated for the relocation of Gazans to other countries.
Tom Fletcher, the UN’s humanitarian chief, warned the US-backed aid plan risked “turning starvation into a bargaining chip” and might “force further displacement” of Palestinians rather than providing neutral and impartial assistance.
GHF heads resigns
Amid the growing backlash and operational chaos, GHF Executive Director Jake Wood and Chief Operations Officer David Burke both resigned in late May.
In a May 25 statement, Wood declared that although he was proud of the foundation’s early work, “it is not possible to implement this plan while also strictly adhering to the humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality, and independence”, a public rebuke that validated long-standing concerns from aid agencies.
Wood, a former U.S. marine and founder of Team Rubicon, a humanitarian organization operating globally, was chosen to lead GHF for his crisis management expertise. His departure, however, raises serious questions about the foundation’s integrity and future and its alignment with non-humanitarian goals.
