What context is left out of humanitarian aid announcements?

Humanitarian aid, wherever it comes from is, is becoming murkier. The only clear aspect about humanitarian aid is that each scheme announced signifies a bid for political influence at the expense of the forcibly displaced population of Gaza.

US Ambassador to the UN Jeff Bartos recently urged UNRWA donors to fund the Board of Peace instead, in a bid to oust UNRWA completely and render the agency irrelevant to Palestinian refugees. The bid, of course, is futile, since UNRWA was created specifically to cater for Palestinian refugees. Despite all the discrepancies it operates from as a result of diplomacy and enforced neutrality, UNRWA is still part of the Palestinian refugees’ narrative, as well as a vital component of the international community’s humanitarian paradigm; the latter keeping Palestinians colonised.

Yesterday the European Commission announced a financial contribution of €883.6 million for early recovery actions in Gaza. Thirteen countries are participating, as well as the EC, the European Investment Bank and the World Bank. The second meeting of the Palestine Donor Group was attended by the Board of Peace’s High Representative Nickolay Mladenov.

According to the EC’s press release, the Team Gaza Initiative will be responsible for coordinating humanitarian projects in Gaza. “The EU-led Initiative is grounded in the shared commitment to support and advance the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict under United Nations Security Council Resolution 2803.”

If one considers the fact that the Board of Peace is not averse to Israel’s military occupation of Gaza, which now encompasses almost 70 per cent of the territory, what does the EC mean when it announces a fund for early recovery actions in Gaza? Rebuilding Gaza has taken a very different meaning from earlier concepts, before the UN Security Council voted for US President Donald Trump’s 20-point plan.

The earlier failures to rebuild Gaza are now juxtaposed against a plan to permanently displace Palestinians from Gaza, which begs the question as to what purpose humanitarian aid is truly serving.

Does the fund target the entirety of Gaza and Palestinians in Gaza, or does it complement the schemes set out by the Board of Peace, such as the pilot humanitarian zone which so far does not have a specified location?

Besides the obvious collaboration with the Board of Peace which so far has not been exemplary when it comes to the political and human rights of the forcibly displaced Palestinian population of Gaza, humanitarian aid keeps failing its own stated purpose. It operates without consideration of the colonial and genocidal reality that Gaza has experienced. The EU, for example, purportedly opposed territorial changes when the Orange Line was reported to have engulfed over 60 per cent of Gaza, yet it is collaborating in a humanitarian initiative which does not oppose territorial theft in Gaza.

One can only conclude, therefore, that humanitarian aid is in dire need of human rights and international law violations. The same goes for any entity involved in humanitarian paradigms.

In Gaza humanitarian aid is provided only on the guarantee that Palestinians remain perpetually dependent on foreign aid. The formula is simple and against human rights, but who will take a stance against the UN, when its international essence ensures complete complicity?

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.