How humanitarian aid became a tool to empty Gaza

In the history of modern conflict, perhaps no narrative is as disturbing as the deliberate misuse of humanitarian aid to achieve geopolitical goals. Gaza—a territory battered by decades of war and blockade—now faces a new and insidious threat: a plan disguised as salvation for its starving population, but in reality, a calculated blueprint for Palestinian displacement. Reports have emerged about the establishment of the so-called Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF)—a shadowy organization backed by former CIA operatives, Israeli tech entrepreneurs, and private security firms. GHF has positioned itself to take control of aid distribution, sidestepping formal international bodies like the United Nations. Far from being a symbol of hope, this initiative, born after the Hamas attacks of October 7, 2023, appears to be a demographic engineering tool, especially targeting northern Gaza. The resignation of GHF CEO Jake Wood, who cited the foundation’s incompatibility with humanitarian principles, has only deepened suspicions about its true motives.

The mask of humanitarianism

GHF was introduced as an American-led initiative responding to Gaza’s severe humanitarian crisis—where over 95 per cent of agricultural land has been destroyed. Yet the nature and operations of the foundation quickly raised alarms. Though claiming “independence,” it was founded by former Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) officers, ex-officials from Israel’s Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), Israeli tech entrepreneurs, and an Israeli-American investor. Its ties to U.S. security firms like Safe Reach Solutions and UG Solutions—both linked to former CIA officer Philip F. Reilly—suggest a far more complex agenda. Reilly, who once trained right-wing Nicaraguan Contras in the 1980s and served as CIA station chief in Kabul, brings a troubling legacy to this venture. GHF’s opaque funding—allegedly over $100 million from unnamed donors—further erodes public trust. Meanwhile, the UN, traditionally central in aid coordination, has been sidelined. A UN spokesperson called GHF’s actions “a distraction” from the urgent need to reopen crossings and restore standard aid routes. The UN’s Middle East envoy warned that Gaza’s population is “starving and deprived of basic needs” and the region is at a “dangerous tipping point.” GHF’s reliance on private military contractors, rather than humanitarian institutions, signals that its true goal is not aid—but control.

READ: 30 Palestinians killed, 150 injured as Israeli forces open fire on aid seekers in southern Gaza

The role of US security firms: A dangerous model

The involvement of private American security firms like Safe Reach Solutions and UG Solutions is deeply troubling. Safe Reach, run by U.S. attorney James Kandiff—who also registered GHF—has operated in Gaza since early 2025. Staffed largely by ex-CIA, Blackwater, and U.S. military personnel, these firms are not neutral actors. Their presence edges the U.S. closer to direct entanglement in Gaza and risks escalating regional tensions. Although The New York Times reported their involvement as “indirect,” Kandiff’s dual role undermines that claim and suggests overlapping interests. 

While the use of military contractors in humanitarian operations has precedent, it has always been controversial. In Gaza—where civilians are already under fire—the presence of armed contractors poses new threats. In one instance, around 40 civilians were injured during an aid drop, most shot by Israeli forces. The inclusion of U.S. contractors raises concerns over accountability and potential human rights abuses. Worse yet, these firms operate without transparency: Safe Reach’s funding sources are unknown, and UG Solutions remains shrouded in secrecy—fueling skepticism about the operation’s true purpose.

Jake Wood’s resignation: Cracks in the façade

The sudden resignation of Jake Wood, GHF’s CEO, exposed the organization’s internal contradictions. A former U.S. Marine with experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, Wood was recruited to help raise funds. Upon leaving, he reaffirmed his commitment to humanitarian principles—humanity, neutrality, impartiality, and independence—saying that GHF’s structure made those principles impossible to uphold. His departure is a damning indictment of the foundation and its veiled ambitions.

Wood’s statement highlights a key truth: humanitarian aid cannot be separated from ethics. GHF’s alliance with security firms and its alignment with Israel’s strategic interests violate the very principles it claims to represent. The UN has long emphasized the need for impartiality and independence in effective aid delivery. GHF’s militarized and opaque structure fails these standards—functioning more as a geopolitical instrument than a life-saving initiative.

Aid as a weapon of forced displacement

The most alarming aspect of the plan is its endgame: using humanitarian aid as cover for the forced displacement of Palestinians, particularly from northern Gaza. GHF is seen as part of a broader U.S.-Israeli strategy of enforced starvation as a political lever—originating with the U.S. cut to UNRWA funding in January 2024. This aligns with Israel’s long-term siege strategy, where only “drips” of aid are allowed in—barely enough to stave off famine. The UN has reported that just 4.6 per cent of farmland remains usable. By channeling aid through private bodies, Israel gains control over who gets aid, where, and how. This amounts to population control—pushing Palestinians into smaller, more manageable areas. Observers have described it as an effort to “pack Palestinians into an even smaller piece of land.”

This tactic bears the marks of ethnic cleansing, masked as humanitarian intervention. Backed by American security firms, GHF enables Israel to perpetuate hunger and displacement under the guise of relief. UN warnings of a “cruel new phase” in the war—defined by rising hunger and destruction—underscore the urgency of exposing this deception. Israel and its U.S. partners present aid as a solution while blocking its delivery, prolonging Gaza’s suffering and advancing their ultimate goal: emptying the region of Palestinians.

Wider implications: A global trust crisis

The emergence of GHF and the involvement of U.S. intelligence and security agencies have far-reaching consequences. First, this model erodes trust in humanitarian institutions. Despite financial challenges, the UN remains the backbone of global relief. Replacing it with militarized, opaque entities like GHF damages the credibility of the international aid system. Second, this project risks drawing the U.S. into direct conflict with Hamas and other groups in Gaza, as American contractors may be seen as Israeli proxies. Third, it sets a dangerous precedent for weaponizing humanitarian crises for geopolitical leverage in other parts of the world.

Unmasking the deception

The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is not a response to human suffering—it is a manifestation of a dark and dangerous plan. With the support of U.S. security and intelligence actors, Israel is using the promise of aid as a tool for starvation and forced displacement. The resignation of Jake Wood, the involvement of figures like Philip F. Reilly, and the shadowy operations of firms like Safe Reach Solutions all point to one grim reality: this isn’t about saving lives—it’s about domination and removal. The international community must expose this deception and demand that humanitarian aid be delivered transparently and impartially, through organizations like the United Nations. Only by stripping away the mask of this project can humanity begin to return to a region that has long suffered under siege. The people of Gaza deserve aid that saves lives—not a strategy that severs them from their homeland.

OPINION: The beginning of the end of unshakeable support: Why US public opinion is turning away from Israel

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