logo
USAID analysis found no evidence of massive Hamas theft of Gaza aid

USAID analysis found no evidence of massive Hamas theft of Gaza aid

RTÉ News​25-07-2025
An internal US government analysis found no evidence of systematic theft by the Palestinian militant group Hamas of US-funded humanitarian supplies, challenging the main rationale that Israel and the US give for backing a new armed private aid operation.
The analysis, which has not been previously reported, was conducted by a bureau within the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and completed in late June. It examined 156 incidents of theft or loss of US-funded supplies reported by US aid partner organisations between October 2023 and this May.
It found "no reports alleging Hamas" benefited from US-funded supplies, according to a slide presentation of the findings seen by Reuters.
A US State Department spokesperson disputed the findings, saying there is video evidence of Hamas looting aid, but provided no such videos. The spokesperson also accused traditional humanitarian groups of covering up "aid corruption".
The findings were shared with the USAID's inspector general's office and State Department officials involved in Middle East policy, said two sources familiar with the matter, and come as dire food shortages deepen in the devastated enclave.
Israel says it is committed to allowing in aid but must control it to prevent it from being stolen by Hamas, which it blames for the crisis.
The UN World Food Programme says nearly a quarter of Gaza's 2.1 million Palestinians face famine-like conditions, thousands are suffering acute malnutrition, and the World Health Organization and doctors in the enclave report starvation deaths of children and others.
The UN also estimates that Israeli forces have killed more than 1,000 people seeking food supplies, the majority near the militarised distribution sites of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), the new private aid group that uses a for-profit US logistics firm run by a former CIA officer and armed US military veterans.
The study was conducted by the Bureau of Humanitarian Assistance (BHA) of USAID, which was the largest funder of assistance to Gaza before the Trump administration froze all US foreign aid in January, terminating thousands of programmes. It has also begun dismantling USAID, whose functions have been folded into the State Department.
The analysis found that at least 44 of the 156 incidents where aid supplies were reported stolen or lost were "either directly or indirectly" due to Israeli military actions, according to the briefing slides.
Israel's military did not respond to questions about those findings.
The study noted a limitation: because Palestinians who receive aid cannot be vetted, it was possible that US-funded supplies went to administrative officials of Hamas, the Islamist rulers of Gaza.
One source familiar with the study also cautioned that the absence of reports of widespread aid diversion by Hamas "does not mean that diversion has not occurred".
The war in Gaza began after Hamas attacked Israel in October 2023, killing 1,200 people and capturing 251 hostages, according to Israeli tallies. Nearly 60,000 Palestinians have been killed since the Israeli assault began, according to Palestinian health officials.
Israel says Hamas diverts humanitarian aid
Israel, which controls access to Gaza, has said that Hamas steals food supplies from UN and other organisations to use to control the civilian population and boost its finances, including by jacking up the prices of the goods and reselling them to civilians.
Asked about the USAID report, the Israeli military told Reuters that its allegations are based on intelligence reports that Hamas militants seized cargoes by "both covertly and overtly" embedding themselves on aid trucks.
Those reports also show that Hamas has diverted up to 25% of aid supplies to its fighters or sold them to civilians, the Israeli military said, adding that GHF has ended the militants' control of aid by distributing it directly to civilians.
Hamas denies the allegations. A Hamas security official said that Israel has killed more than 800 Hamas-affiliated police and security guards trying to protect aid vehicles and convoy routes. Their missions were coordinated with the UN.
Reuters could not independently verify the claims by Hamas and Israel, which has not made public proof that the militants have systematically stolen aid.
GHF also accuses Hamas of massive aid theft in defending its distribution model. The UN and other groups have rejected calls by GHF, Israel and the US to cooperate with the foundation, saying it violates international humanitarian principles of neutrality.
In response to a request for comment, GHF referred Reuters to a 2 July Washington Post article that quoted an unidentified Gazan and anonymous Israeli officials as saying Hamas profited from the sales and taxing of pilfered humanitarian aid.
Aid groups required to report losses
The 156 reports of theft or losses of supplies reviewed by BHA were filed by UN agencies and other humanitarian groups working in Gaza as a condition of receiving US aid funds.
The second source familiar with the matter said that after receiving reports of US-funded aid thefts or losses, USAID staff followed up with partner organisations to try to determine if there was Hamas involvement.
Those organisations also would "redirect or pause" aid distributions if they learned that Hamas was in the vicinity, the source said. Aid organisations working in Gaza also are required to vet their personnel, sub-contractors and suppliers for ties to extremist groups before receiving US funds, a condition that the State Department waived in approving $30m for GHF last month.
The slide presentation noted that USAID partners tended to over-report aid diversion and theft by groups sanctioned or designated by the US as foreign terrorist organisations - such as Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad - because they want to avoid losing US funding.
Of the 156 incidents of loss or theft reported, 63 were attributed to unknown perpetrators, 35 to armed actors, 25 to unarmed people, 11 directly to Israeli military action, 11 to corrupt sub-contractors, five to aid group personnel "engaging in corrupt activities," and six to "others," a category that accounted for "commodities stolen in unknown circumstances," according to the slide presentation.
The armed actors "included gangs and other miscellaneous individuals who may have had weapons," said a slide. Another slide said "a review of all 156 incidents found no affiliations with" US-designated foreign terrorist organisations, of which Hamas is one.
"The majority of incidents could not be definitively attributed to a specific actor," said another slide.
"Partners often largely discovered the commodities had been stolen in transit without identifying the perpetrator."
It is possible there were classified intelligence reports on Hamas aid thefts, but BHA staff lost access to classified systems in the dismantlement of USAID, said a slide.
However, a source familiar with US intelligence assessments said that they knew of no US intelligence reports detailing Hamas aid diversions and that Washington was relying on Israeli reports.
The BHA analysis found that the Israeli military "directly or indirectly caused" a total of 44 incidents in which US-funded aid was lost or stolen. Those included the 11 attributed to direct Israeli military actions, such as airstrikes or orders to Palestinians to evacuate areas of the war-torn enclave.
Losses indirectly attributed to Israeli military included cases where they compelled aid groups to use delivery routes with high risks of theft or looting, ignoring requests for alternative routes, the analysis said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Maga versus the EU: are European regulators a target in Trump's war on online ‘censorship'?
Maga versus the EU: are European regulators a target in Trump's war on online ‘censorship'?

Irish Times

time38 minutes ago

  • Irish Times

Maga versus the EU: are European regulators a target in Trump's war on online ‘censorship'?

A fortnight ago, US secretary of state Marco Rubio revoked visas and thus blocked a judge and members of his family from entering the United States. Accusing the judge of a 'political witch hunt' against former Brazilian leader Jair Bolsonaro – a far-right populist with close links to Donald Trump 's 'Maga' movement – Rubio maintained that this involved 'a persecution and censorship complex so sweeping that it not only violates basic rights of Brazilians, but also extends beyond Brazil's shores to target Americans'. 'President Trump made clear that his administration will hold accountable foreign nationals who are responsible for censorship of protected expression in the United States', he said. Censorship of free speech has become a very important issue for the Trump administration, particularly on restrictions on what is said online. READ MORE Some on the right in the US are concerned that regulations imposed on Big Tech in Europe are blowing back across the Atlantic and targeting conservatives. In Washington, where Republicans control the White House and Congress, this is a politically explosive charge. Rubio had announced in late May a new policy that would impose visa bans on foreign nationals the administration deemed to be censoring Americans and suggested this could include officials regulating US tech companies. He said it was unacceptable for foreign officials to demand American tech platforms adopt global content moderation policies or engage in censorship activity that reached into the United States. Rubio's visa ban on the Brazilian judge may not have been headline news internationally, but it was noticed in Brussels and among those regulating Big Tech. It is understood that following Rubio's policy announcement in May some figures in Ireland's media regulatory body, Coimisiún na Meán , made enquiries to the Department of Foreign Affairs as to what this could mean. No one was really sure. Coimisiún na Meán is responsible for the application and enforcement of the European Union's Digital Services Act (DSA) in Ireland. But the European Commission also monitors areas such as ensuring very large online platforms conduct regular risk assessments on illegal content or material that could negatively affect elections, security or public health. The visa ban on the Brazilian judge showed Washington's policy shift in May was not just rhetoric; regulators, officials and their families could be banned from entering the United States. Musk and Zuckerberg In early July a Christian advocacy group called ADF International argued online that the EU's DSA represented a threat to free speech 'and must be repealed'. Shortly afterward Elon Musk , owner of social media platform X, replied: 'Yes'. It was an indication of the concern among US tech companies at what they saw as unfair overseas taxation and regulation. In January Meta chief Mark Zuckerberg argued that Europe had 'an ever-increasing number of laws institutionalising censorship'. These comments were rejected by politicians in Europe who, in turn, were alarmed by Musk urging Germans on his social media platform to vote for the far right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party in elections. Ideological and financial concerns There was a time when many on the right in the US viewed the tech industry as a bastion of Silicon Valley liberals. In more recent times, the US tech sector has forged close links with Trump. The Wall Street Journal reported last month that after Trump's election last November, tech chiefs including Zuckerberg and Google's Sundar Pichai met the incoming president at his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida and that the need to curb 'harmful policies' overseas consistently came up in their conversations. The concerns of Big Tech and Trump's Maga movement appeared to be aligning to a degree. Dubliner Ian Plunkett, a tech policy analyst in Washington, DC, told The Irish Times that Big Tech companies had adopted a pragmatic approach under the new Trump administration. Those companies that stood by Trump at his inauguration in January were following the power, he said. Many in Trump's Maga base considered regulatory enforcement in Europe as an attack on American innovation, he said; in the eyes of those in Trump's base, US companies had developed this global technology but other countries then had the temerity to impose taxes through the enforcement of regulations that they regarded contrary to their interpretation of the freedom of speech provisions in the US constitution. Trump supporters may have ideological concerns about European regulators curtailing their free speech, but the US tech sector is also looking at the potential financial impact of European regulations. It was widely reported in the US in recent months that Musk's X social media network faced potential fines of up to €1 billion for violations of the EU's DSA, although this has been denied by the European Commission . Over recent months the House of Representatives committee on the judiciary, chaired by republican Jim Jordan, has been carrying out an investigation into 'how and to what extent foreign laws, regulations and judicial orders compel, coerce or influence companies to censor speech in the United States'. Last week in an interim staff report, the committee strongly criticised the DSA as 'the EU's comprehensive digital censorship law'. The report argued that this legislation stemmed originally from claims of Russian interference in elections in the US and in France. In the theology of Maga, this is considered heresy, as it implies that Trump did not win the White House fairly in 2016. The report describes as 'inaccurate' EU claims that the DSA applies only to Europe and that it targets only what is harmful or illegal. 'Non-public documents reveal that European regulators use the DSA to target core political speech that is neither harmful nor illegal and to pressure platforms, primarily American social media companies, to change their global content moderation policies in response to European demands,' the report said. 'Put simply, the DSA infringes on American online speech.' The report points to an EU Commission workshop last May where, it maintains, a hypothetical social media post stating: 'We need to take back our country' was categorised as 'illegal hate speech' that platforms were required to censor under the DSA. The committee described the term as 'a common, anodyne political statement'. 'The DSA incentivises social media companies to comply with the EU's censorship demands because the penalties for failing to do so are large, including fines up to 6 per cent of their global revenue,' the report said. 'If 'extraordinary circumstances lead to a serious threat to public security or public health in the Union', regulators are even empowered to temporarily shut down platforms within the EU.' Ireland 'unusually exposed' Members of the House committee that drew up the report were in Ireland this week and held meetings with tech companies and Coimisiún na Meán. The delegation's visit also came in the week that X lost a legal challenge to aspects of Ireland's online safety code that are viewed by the Irish Government as crucial in protecting children. But it was not the first time that visitors from Washington had travelled to Dublin to discuss online regulation. Staff at Coimisiún na Meán met representatives from the US state department on May 30th 'following a request from the US embassy to better understand its functions and international collaboration'. On May 19th, state department officials told Coimisiún na Meán the visitors from Washington would 'like to understand how Ireland navigates balancing the protection of freedom of expression with the need to address and mitigate hate speech and online harms. 'They would like to understand how the Media Commission approaches implementation of the DSA and domestic hate speech laws, including their impact on American companies.' A note prepared by Coimisiún na Meán after the meeting said it had provided an introduction to fundamental rights, 'including on empowering users who can see if and why their content has been removed or restricted online under the Digital Services Act'. 'Some general discussion on freedom of expression and the differences between US law and European and member state law followed.' Coimisiún na Meán told The Irish Times in June that the US officials 'did not seek any changes to any aspect of An Coimisiún's regulatory work at this meeting, nor did they express any concerns in relation to it'. The US state department said officials from the bureau of democracy, human rights and labour had visited Ireland 'to underscore the administration's support for freedom of expression and the ability of all voices to be heard in the political process and to learn more about the Irish government's approach to protecting human rights'. Dr TJ McIntyre, associate professor at the Sutherland School of Law in UCD and chair of civil liberties group Digital Rights Ireland, said the fact that so many big tech companies have headquarters in this country meant Ireland was 'unusually exposed' in the arguments over regulation and censorship. The extent to which Irish law affected some of the right-wing agenda being promoted by some firms and their owners meant 'you can expect further interference in the Irish democratic process' to try to enable them to continue with that agenda, he said.

NI community projects fear closure after US and UK funding reportedly pulled from peace organisation
NI community projects fear closure after US and UK funding reportedly pulled from peace organisation

Irish Times

time38 minutes ago

  • Irish Times

NI community projects fear closure after US and UK funding reportedly pulled from peace organisation

A number of community and peacebuilding projects supported by the International Fund for Ireland (IFI) fear they will close due to the reported loss of vital funding from the US . It also emerged this week that the UK government had pulled a promised £1 million , citing budgetary pressures. However, multiple organisations told The Irish Times their 'bigger concern' was the halting of the US contribution to the peacebuilding and reconciliation body. The IFI said it had received financial support from 'a range of international donors including the US government' and was seeking clarity and support from its US partners. READ MORE The peacebuilding organisation was established by the British and Irish governments in 1986 to promote economic and social development and bring together nationalist, unionist and cross-Border communities. Since then, the IFI has spent €974 million supporting more than 6,000 projects, including efforts to remove peace walls and to prevent young people from being recruited or attacked by paramilitaries. The US government has traditionally been the IFI's largest funder. According to the IFI's accounts, its donations last year came from two sources, €2.5 million from the US and €5.5 million from the Irish Government. USAid, which administers foreign aid for the US government, was closed by president Donald Trump earlier this year. [ Senator George Mitchell: Northern Ireland's peace must evolve. And if it is here to stay it must be shared Opens in new window ] In February, Donald Trump's administration cut USAid jobs. Photographer: Pete Kiehart/Bloomberg via Getty Images It is not yet clear precisely how this will impact the IFI, but groups which deliver its projects in Ireland fear their funding will not be renewed at the end of this financial year. 'Since Donald Trump removed the USAid ... they've been more or less telling us we don't have any funding,' said a representative of one community organisation, who asked to remain anonymous so as not to jeopardise their contract. 'We've been told we should look for other funding if we want to keep the project going.' Conal McFeely, of Creggan Enterprises, which has previously received IFI funding, said: 'We've been told the reason the IFI are now considering withdrawing is because they've been choked of this funding from USAid, and they're out telling groups they're not going to continue their funding'. Emphasising the 'highly significant' role the body had played, he said it was 'instrumental in bedding down the peace here and attempting to contain and settle the conflict. They're a key player'. But he said 'a number of programmes, particularly in the Derry area, including here in Creggan, have been informed it's likely their programmes will not be funded beyond the current term, and they've been told to consider winding the projects down. 'There is a complete lack of alternative funders willing to take a risk ... lots of those initiatives will unfortunately fall by the wayside,' he added. Mr McFeely added it was 'extremely disappointing' the UK government was 'withholding its last [£1 million] phase of funding, and that will have a detrimental impact on the ground here in terms of marginalised communities that are still dealing with the fallout from the conflict. 'If the Irish Government is still prepared to put in money, why is the British government not matching that money? It's scandalous,' he said. In a statement, the IFI said that it 'has received financial support from a range of international donors including the US government, the European Union, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland and the UK. 'We are grateful for the long-standing support from all our partners, including the bipartisan support under various US administrations,' it said. 'We are continuing to engage with our US partners to seek clarity around support from the US government which will play a key role in the delivery of the IFI's programmes into the future.' It said all projects currently funded by the IFI 'remain unaffected and their funding is secure as per their letters of offer'. 'Support from the US and others remains critical in our ability to deliver peace and reconciliation initiatives in Northern Ireland and the southern border counties,' the body said.

Trump orders firing of US official over jobs market report
Trump orders firing of US official over jobs market report

RTÉ News​

timean hour ago

  • RTÉ News​

Trump orders firing of US official over jobs market report

US President Donald Trump said he has ordered the firing of a key economic official, accusing her of manipulating employment data for political reasons after a new report showed cracks in the US jobs market. US job growth missed expectations in July, Labor Department data showed, and revisions to hiring figures in recent months brought them to the weakest levels since the Covid-19 pandemic. Without providing evidence, Mr Trump lashed out at the department's commissioner of labour statistics, writing on social media that the jobs numbers "were RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad". In a separate post on his Truth Social platform, he charged that Commissioner Erika McEntarfer had "faked" jobs data to boost Democrats' chances of victory in the recent presidential election. "McEntarfer said there were only 73,000 Jobs added (a shock!) but, more importantly, that a major mistake was made by them, 258,000 Jobs downward, in the prior two months," Mr Trump said, referring to latest data for July. "Similar things happened in the first part of the year, always to the negative," Mr Trump said, insisting that the world's biggest economy was "booming" under his leadership. He later told reporters "we need people that we can trust," accusing the economic official of inflating hiring figures under former president Joe Biden's administration. 'Dangerous precedent' The United States added 73,000 jobs last month, while the unemployment rate rose to 4.2% from 4.1%, said the Department of Labor yesterday. Hiring numbers for May were revised down from 144,000 to 19,000. The figure for June was shifted from 147,000 to 14,000. This was notably lower than job creation levels in recent years. During the pandemic, the economy lost jobs. The employment data points to challenges in the key labour market as companies took a cautious approach in hiring and investment while grappling with Mr Trump's sweeping - and rapidly changing - tariffs this year. The numbers also pile pressure on the central bank as it mulls the best time to cut interest rates. With tariff levels climbing since the start of the year, both on imports from various countries and on sector-specific products such as steel, aluminum and autos, many firms have faced higher business costs. Some are now passing them on to consumers. William Beach, who previously held Ms McEntarfer's post at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, warned that her firing "sets a dangerous precedent and undermines the statistical mission of the Bureau." The National Association for Business Economics condemned her dismissal, saying large revisions in jobs numbers "reflect not manipulation, but rather the dwindling resources afforded to statistical agencies." "Firing the head of a key government agency because you don't like the numbers they report, which come from surveys using long established procedures, is what happens in authoritarian countries, not democratic ones," slammed Larry Summers, former US Treasury secretary under Democratic president Bill Clinton. 'Gamechanger' Heather Long, chief economist at the Navy Federal Credit Union, said the latest jobs report was a "gamechanger". "The labour market is deteriorating quickly," said Ms Long, noting that of the growth in July, "75 percent of those jobs were in one sector: health care." "The economy needs certainty soon on tariffs," Ms Long said. "The longer this tariff whiplash lasts, the more likely this weak hiring environment turns into layoffs." It remains unclear when the dust will settle, with Mr Trump ordering the reimposition of steeper tariffs on scores of economies late Thursday, which are set to take effect in a week. A sharp weakening in the labour market could push the Federal Reserve toward slashing interest rates sooner to shore up the economy. Yesterday, the two Fed officials who voted this week against the central bank's decision to keep rates unchanged warned that standing pat risks further damaging the economy. Both Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman and Governor Christopher Waller argued that the inflationary effects of tariffs were temporary. They added in separate statements that the bank should focus on fortifying the economy to avert further weakening in the labor market. Putting off an interest rate cut "could result in a deterioration in the labor market and a further slowing in economic growth," Ms Bowman said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store