US approves $30m funding for controversial Israeli-supported relief effort in Gaza
THE UNITED STATES has approved its first direct funding for a controversial Israeli-supported relief effort in the Gaza Strip and urged other countries to follow suit.
'We have approved funding for $30 million to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF). And we call on other countries to also support the GHF and its critical work,' State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott told reporters.
Starting in March, Israel blocked deliveries of food and other crucial supplies into Gaza for more than two months, leading to warnings of famine in the territory widely flattened by Israeli bombing since the 7 October, 2023 attack on Israel by Hamas.
The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, backed by armed US contractors with the Israeli troops on the perimeter, began operations at the end of May that have been marred by chaotic scenes, deaths and neutrality concerns.
The Gaza health ministry says that since late May, nearly 550 people have been killed near aid centres while seeking scarce supplies.
Israeli forces have on a number of occasions opened fire on crowds of hungry people who were making their way to distribution points operated by the GHF.
The first deadly incident happened on the morning of Sunday, 25 May, when
31 Palestinians were killed by Israeli gunfire
, according to the Gaza Civil Defence agency.
The GHF has denied that deadly incidents have occurred in the immediate vicinity of its aid points.
There are often full internet blackouts in Gaza, but the GHF informs people in the region about the operation of distribution centres on Facebook with little advance notice.
Major aid groups and the United Nations have refused to work with the officially private group, saying it violates basic humanitarian principles by coordinating delivery with troops.
UN rights office spokesman Thameen Al-Kheetan warned this week of
'scenes of chaos around the food distribution points' of the GHF.
Since the organisation began operating, 'the Israeli military has shelled and shot Palestinians trying to reach the distribution points, leading to many fatalities', he said.
Kheetan cautioned that the system 'endangers civilians and contributes to the catastrophic humanitarian situation in Gaza'.
'The weaponisation of food for civilians, in addition to restricting or preventing their access to life-sustaining services, constitutes a war crime, and, under certain circumstances, may constitute elements of other crimes under international law,' he added.
The man who was initially heading up the organisation, US military veteran Jake Wood, resigned the day before it began operating in Gaza, citing similar concerns to those expressed by the UN.
A former USAID contractor, John Acree, took over as John Wood's interim replacement and
evangelical preacher and former Trump campaign advisor
was named Reverend Johnnie Moore was named the new chairman earlier this month.
Asked about the criticism of the operation, Pigott said that the 46 million meals the group says it has so far distributed are 'absolutely incredible' and 'should be applauded.'
'From day one, we said we are open to creative solutions that securely provide aid to those in Gaza and protects Israel,' Pigott said.
The financial support to the GHF is part of President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio's 'pursuit of peace in the region,' he said.
-With additional reporting from
© AFP 2025
Advertisement
Related Reads
UN condemns Israel's 'weaponisation of food' in Gaza as another 25 people reported killed
'I saw a man crushed': Behind the scenes of the humanitarian aid chaos in Gaza
Israeli forces kill more than 50 and wound over 200 in latest massacre at aid site in Gaza
Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article.
Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.
Learn More
Support The Journal
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Examiner
an hour ago
- Irish Examiner
Criminalise fossil fuel disinformation and ban its lobbying, says UN expert
A leading UN expert is calling for criminal penalties against those peddling disinformation about the climate crisis and a total ban on fossil fuel industry lobbying and advertising, as part of a radical shake-up to safeguard human rights and curtail planetary catastrophe. Elisa Morgera, the UN special rapporteur on human rights and climate change who presented her damning new report to the general assembly in Geneva on Monday, argues that the US, Britain, Canada, Australia and other wealthy fossil fuel nations are legally obliged under international law to fully phase out oil, gas and coal by 2030 – and compensate communities for harms caused. Fracking, oil sands and gas flaring should be banned, as should fossil fuel exploration, subsidies, investments and false tech solutions that will lock in future generations to polluting and increasingly costly oil, gas and coal. 'Despite overwhelming evidence of the interlinked, intergenerational, severe and widespread human rights impacts of the fossil fuel life cycle … these countries have and are still accruing enormous profits from fossil fuels, and are still not taking decisive action,' said Morgera, professor of global environmental law at the University of Strathclyde. These countries are responsible for not having prevented the widespread human rights harm arising from climate change and other planetary crises we are facing – biodiversity loss, plastic pollution and economic inequalities – caused by fossil fuels extraction, use and waste. Island nations, Indigenous and other vulnerable communities – who have benefited least from fossil fuels – now face the worst and compounding harms caused by the climate crisis and other environmental harms linked to their extraction, transport and use for energy, fuel, plastics and synthetic fertilizers. The report points to a mountain of evidence on the severe, far-reaching and cumulative damage caused by the fossil fuel industry – oil, gas, coal, fertilizers and plastics – on almost every human right including the rights to life, self-determination, health, food, water, housing, education, information and livelihoods. Morgera makes the case for the 'defossilisation' of our entire economies – in other words the eradication of fossil fuels from all sectors including politics, finance, food, media, tech and knowledge. The transition to clean energy is not enough to tackle the widespread and mounting harms caused by the fossil fuels, she argues. In order to comply with existing international human rights law, states are obliged to inform their citizens about the widespread harms caused by fossil fuels and that phasing out oil, gas and coal is the most effective way to fight the climate crisis. People also have the right to know how the industry – and its allies – has for 60 years systematically obstructed access to this knowledge and meaningful climate action by peddling disinformation and misinformation, attacks on climate scientists and activists, and by capturing democratic decision-making spaces, including the annual UN climate negotiations. In the imperative of defossilising our economies report, Morgera said: The fossil fuel playbook has undermined the protection of all human rights that are negatively impacted by climate change for over six decades. States must ban fossil fuel ads and lobbying, criminalise greenwashing (misinformation and misrepresentation) by the fossil fuel industry, media and advertising firms, and enforce harsh penalties for attacks on climate advocates who are facing a rise in malicious lawsuits, online harassment and physical violence. Communities across the world are facing growing threats from sea level rise, desertification, drought, melting glaciers, extreme heat, floods, and other climate-related impacts. This is on top of the deadly air pollution, water scarcity, biodiversity loss, and forced displacement of Indigenous and rural peoples associated with every stage of the fossil fuel lifecycle. Fossil fuel earnings Meanwhile, fossil fuel and petrochemical companies have benefited from huge profits, taxpayer subsidies, tax avoidance schemes and undue protection under international investment law – without ever reducing energy poverty and economic inequalities. In 2023, oil and gas companies globally earned $2.4tn, while coal companies pocketed $2.5tn, according to the report. Removing fossil fuel subsidies, estimated to have topped $1.4tn for OECD members and 48 other countries in 2023, would alone reduce emissions by up to 10% by 2030. Redirecting these subsidies would help wealthy fossil fuel-producing states fulfill their legal obligations to aid developing countries to phase out fossil fuels – and provide financial and other remedies for the widespread human rights violations and environmental damage they have caused – and continue to cause. The compensation could also be funded by enforcing penalties for damages caused by fossil fuel companies, and cracking down on tax evasion and avoidance by the industry, as well as introducing wealth and windfall taxes. States could – and should – require the industry to finance climate adaptation, mitigation and loss and damage through climate superfunds or other mechanisms that are directly accessible to affected communities. Land unjustly appropriated for fossil fuel operations should be cleaned up, remediated and returned to Indigenous communities, people of African descent and peasants, if they want it back, or they should be fairly compensated, Morgera argues. Human rights The report lays out the human rights case for decisive and transformative political action to limit the pain and suffering from the climate crisis. The recommendations offer a glimpse at a world in which the basic rights of all people are prioritised above the profits and benefits enjoyed by a few, but will probably be dismissed by some as radical and untenable. 'Paradoxically what may seem radical or unrealistic – a transition to a renewable energy-based economy – is now cheaper and safer for our economics and a healthier option for our societies,' Morgera told the Guardian. 'The transition can also lead to significant savings of taxpayers' money that is currently going into responding to climate change impacts, saving health costs, and also recouping lost tax revenue from fossil fuel companies. "This could be the single most impactful health contribution we could ever make. The transition seems radical and unrealistic because fossil fuel companies have been so good at making it seem so.' The Guardian
RTÉ News
an hour ago
- RTÉ News
Former HHC vape users warn of serious mental health effects
Iran holds funeral ceremonies for commanders and scientists killed in Israeli strikes Iran holds funeral ceremonies for commanders and scientists killed in Israeli strikes News
Extra.ie
2 hours ago
- Extra.ie
Gardaí issue advice following new US visa requirements
Gardaí have issued advice after new requirements for visa applications to the United States of America were revealed. Amongst the stringent regulations, applicants for F, M and J non-immigrant US visas will be required to ensure their social media accounts are set to public. Their social media handles will be required when filling out the DS-160 visa application form. Their social media handles will be required when filling out the DS-160 visa application form. Pic: Shutterstock An Garda Síochána in Kilkenny said it was 'a bit of a quandary' as they stressed that 'privacy is number 1.' Taking to Facebook, the official account for the force in The Marble City said the daughter of a friend of the force has been refused a US student visa due to her social media accounts being set to private. Gardaí said: 'This makes sense as people, especially young females may be 'creeped' on by unpleasant online individuals. 'We always recommend keeping accounts private but if you are required to make these accounts public before travelling to a jurisdiction that demands it, please ensure that you do house keeping after and remove unwanted followers and return to private. 'It is understood that most countries that people travel to leave social media settings to user discretion. Just a heads up.' Facebook users flocked to the comments having their say on the new regulations, with one person sharing: 'I got mine in 2023 and the process was already privacy invasive enough then, this new change makes it even worse.' Another wrote: 'Em no thanks, there are plenty of other countries to work in for the summer.' A third echoed: 'That country is becoming a place you really don't want to go to.' Last week, the US embassy in Dublin released a statement confirming that failure to provide social media information could result in visa denial as well as 'ineligibility for future visas.' The US Embassy said that obtaining a visa for the States was a 'privilege, not a right' as they highlighted every decision was one 'made by national security.'
