July 29, 2025 • 58 mins
In this timely webinar on the humanitarian emergency in Gaza, LTC (res.) Or Elrom (former COGAT Senior Officer) and Dr. Shira Efron (Israel Policy Forum’s Research Director and The Diane and Guilford Glazer Foundation Senior Fellow) examine the dire conditions on the ground, barriers to delivering aid, what can be done to address the crisis, and where the international community can play a role.
Read our statement calling for urgent action on Gaza's humanitarian crisis here.
Follow us on Instagram, Twitter/X, and Bluesky, and subscribe to our email list here.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Shanie (00:08):
Hello everyone, thank you for joining us today.
My name is Shini Reichman.
I'm Israel Policy Forum'sDirector of Strategic
Initiatives and the Director ofIPF Atid.
Ipf Atid is our youngprofessionals network, which
informs and empowers the nextgeneration of leaders by
fostering pragmaticconversations around Israel and
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with programming around seven
chapters across North America.
Welcome to those who arejoining us for the first time
(00:30):
and those who are our regularwatchers, as well as all of you
listening on Israel Policy Pod,where we have a recording.
And, of course, a special thankyou to our supporters, who make
it possible for us to producefree, expert analysis and
conversations for ourcommunities.
For the next hour, I'll ask afew questions of our two guests
and we'll also welcome audiencequestions which you can put into
the chat function, and I'mgoing to incorporate as many as
(00:51):
I can throughout this discussion.
This emergency webinar was puttogether in the last 24 hours or
so amid the humanitariancatastrophe in the Gaza Strip.
I'll share IPF's statement onthe crisis in the chat shortly,
in which we advocate for USleadership that facilitates
coordination between the UN,israel and other aid agencies.
We also note the humanitarianneeds of the Gaza Strip cannot
(01:13):
be fully addressed without anend to the war.
Today we'll cover the currenthumanitarian landscape in Gaza
barriers to increasing aid flow,both logistical and political,
what steps can be taken by allparties involved to alleviate
the suffering and how this isall being covered in both
Israeli and international media.
I'm grateful to be joined todayby two experts on these topics.
First we have LieutenantColonel or El-Rom, who's a
(01:36):
former senior officer of COGAT,the Coordination of Government
Activities in the Territories,which is the IDF unit
responsible for overseeing ageof the civilian population in
Gaza and implementing thecivilian policy in the West Bank
, in coordination andcooperation with officials from
defense and government officesin various fields.
In addition to several otherformer leadership positions
within COGAD and the IDF, orrholds a master's in IR and
(01:59):
security studies from Tel AvivUniversity and a master's in
political science and governmentfrom Bar-Ilan Security Studies
from Tel Aviv University andAmbassadors in Political Science
and Government from Bar-Ilan.
We're also joined today by DrShira Efron, who many of you
know, so I'll have a shorter biofor her.
She's our Research Director atIsrael Policy Forum and also the
Diane and Guilford GlazerFoundation Senior Fellow.
She's been advising the UN onissues relating to this, about
the aid in Gaza for many, manyyears.
(02:20):
So, shira, I will start withyou and then we'll move to Orr.
Since the Israel-Hamas warbegan, humanitarian aid has
actually been one of the mostpolitically charged aspects of
the entire conflict, both withinIsrael and in terms of how the
war is perceived among theinternational community.
In the past week, we've seengrowing alarm about the scale of
the crisis in Gaza, includingfrom very mainstream Israeli
(02:42):
voices who have largelyrefrained from speaking up on
the topic until now, mostnotably Amit Segal from Channel
12.
What has changed the past fewweeks or week or so that's led
to this outcry?
Set the stage for us a littlebit.
Shira (02:58):
Hi Shani, hi everyone joining here, and I really thank
Orr for doing this with us.
Just a minor correction I hadadvised the UN years back.
I no longer advise the UN, butthat was on issues pertaining to
Gaza before this war started,actually even before the
previous war.
Guardian of the Walls in 2021.
(03:20):
But to your question so therewere a few things that have
happened recently and I thinkthe media conversation, you know
, the public conversation inIsrael is a topic on its own,
but the outcry here is quitedifferent than it is around the
world.
The debates here are quitedifferent, but there were a few
(03:41):
things that had happened and Ithink we have to go back to
understand that these thingswhile or me correct me.
First of all, there was a senseinside the Israeli defense
establishment and I know thereare talks on denying the fact
that there's hunger andhumanitarian crisis across the
board.
But looking at where Gaza is,based on objective assessment
(04:06):
and the problems associated withthe aid mechanisms that exist
now the Gaza HumanitarianFoundation, ghf it's clearly
there's been objectivechallenges getting aid in to
even more pictures coming out ofGaza that were harder to ignore
(04:26):
and more reports of death fromhunger.
There were a lot of reportspreviously on food insecurity.
There were a lot of threats onfamine that, in the Israeli
mindset at least, did notfulfill.
But there were all these imagesthat were hard to ignore.
(04:48):
But in addition to that, Ithink that what was really
happening is the pressure fromoutside.
So it didn't start fromAmerican pressure.
There was I think it was aboutthree weeks ago or four weeks
ago pressure started coming fromthe Europeans.
The EU, the European Union, isIsrael's number one trading
(05:08):
partner.
It's also the oxygen toIsrael's research and industry
institutions.
Right, everything academic isbasically funded by, or most of
it is funded by, the Europeans.
The aviation agreement, I mean.
Israel is so dependent onEurope and what happened in
Europe is that the EU decided toreassess the association
(05:29):
agreement between Israel and theEU, which is the framework
agreement for Israel'srelationship with the EU.
Now there are countries withinthe EU that are very pro-Israel,
so you can't get to the biggest.
You know sort of the doomsdayscenario of disconnecting.
They started questioning theirrelationship and their
(05:49):
relationship is tied to what wewould call the shared values, a
mutual respect for human rights,and the Europeans and I think
it was the Netherlands that gotthis call to revisit the
assessment basically said thatthey don't think that Israel
respects for human rights, andthis was mostly about Israel's
(06:10):
policy in Gaza.
So already a few weeks ago andI think this was lost on the
media Israel decided to let somefuel tankers go into Gaza and a
few other measurements by theway, also the Palestinian
Authority, but in Ramallah tostave off this pressure.
But then Gideon Saar, theMinister of Foreign Affairs, was
last week by the way, also thePalestinian Authority in
Ramallah to stave off thispressure.
But then Gideon Saar, theminister of foreign affairs, was
last week in Europe and heheard messages from Israel's
(06:31):
friends Germany included, rightthat basically faced him with
the reality of how Israel ispositioned around the world.
In addition to that, we startedhearing more from the US right,
and I was last week inWashington Many of you are in
Washington.
This is a bipartisan issue,whether one side blames Israel
(06:58):
more and others blame Hamas, andyet there's no question this is
in large part Hamas's fault,but no one wants to see those
images from Gaza.
So the pressure started comingfrom the United States, and
we've seen President Trumptalking about it just now again
and doubling up on hisdissatisfaction with the
pictures.
So this all came to a realitywhere Israel was sort of forced
(07:22):
to decide what it was doing andthe timing was not coincidental,
as we were in two and a halfweeks of negotiating a temporary
ceasefire.
There's always like, okay, wecan wait with this decision
because there's going to be aceasefire any moment and then
anyway there's going to be ahumanitarian surge.
But when the negotiations inDoha stopped and didn't look
(07:45):
very promising, israel had to dosomething.
In very classic Israeli policyon Gaza, it was very erratic on
a Saturday morning, right from acomplete yes to no to yes and
no, and all of a sudden Israel,the Air Force, is parachuting,
doing airdrops of UNAID, likereally schizophrenic, if you
(08:07):
will.
Okay, in terms of where thepolicy is, and I'm sure Orr can
elaborate on this.
But there are a few things Now,just on the Israeli media, I
think because of the hostages,because no one in Israel trusts
the UN, because we do have tosay that right, there were so
many warnings that Gaza is onthe verge of famine several
(08:28):
times in those wars Israelisquestion, and because, unlike
the rest of the world, they havenot been seeing those images
from Gaza until now.
They keep.
I can't tell you and probablyor can answer this.
I can't tell you how manyquestions I get a day from very
serious people.
Is there real hunger?
It's not a Hamas campaign.
(08:49):
This hungry kid is actually theskinny kid is actually from
Yemen.
So this is still a debate oflike why are we doing this?
Why do we have to give themfood?
What are we doing?
It's not exactly the outcrythat you are not in our name
kind of campaign.
Still, it is with differentparts of the population, but I
(09:10):
don't think it's the Israelimainstream at the moment.
Shanie (09:13):
Thanks for that, shira.
Let's move to you, or if youcan add anything around that.
I mean, israelis are very goodat dismissing international
criticism historically, and so Iknow that there's been ramping
up criticism, even from Israel'sallies, but again there is a
tendency to say it's propaganda.
They are listening to all ofthese false reports from the UN
and other aid agencies, so whatare you seeing so like?
Or (09:36):
Shira said thanks for having me.
But, as Shira said, the UN indifferent shapes and forms being
frying wolf from, let's say,december 23.
You can see reports from the UNon starvation and nutrition and
how Gaza is on the break of theserious humanitarian crisis in
the world, and ever since wekeep on hearing another IPC
(10:00):
report, another IPC report andnothing happens.
So that's part of why Israel issaying, okay, the UN are just
fine through what Hamas issaying.
And partially it is because,when you look on the UN data
that they are sharing, they'reactually relying on the Ministry
of Health of Hamas because theydon't have any alternative data
and while Israel fails topresent alternative data, those
(10:22):
are the only numbers people aretalking about.
So when the Ministry of Healthare saying 60,000 killed in Gaza
, no one has a different numberto share, rather than say these
are Hamas numbers.
So this is part of the Israeliposition of saying that the UN
choose Hamas sides on thenarrative and therefore we are
(10:46):
treating the narrative as so, asit is Hamas narrative.
And, like Shira said, thediscussion was whether or not
the images are real, whether ornot the picture came from Yemen,
and not necessarily addressingthe core issue on whether or not
enough food is entering Gaza,whether or not enough food is
(11:07):
entering Gaza, whether or notenough food is being distributed
.
And part of the reasons why theIsraeli system takes it more
seriously in the recent weeks isbecause there is a problem.
The GHF mechanism, while somepeople in Israel thought that
this will be the game changer ofthe war, doesn't scale up.
I mean, I can argue on thenumbers that they are presenting
(11:30):
, but even if they did provide100 million meals, like they say
, they don't have the number ofhow many beneficiaries, like how
many people that actuallyaddressed.
And there are 2 million peoplein Gaza.
So that's definitely not enough.
And when the UN are unable andthe rest of the international
organizations are unable to sendfood into Gaza and I think all
(11:54):
of us saw the images of peoplehovering the trucks, you know
the trucks can't even move.
So the UN, and it's like anendless circle, because then the
donors go back to the UN andsay we won't support or we won't
fund aid that is just beinglooted.
So the UN saying okay, if we'regoing to risk our donations,
(12:17):
we're going to halt.
So and it's like a chicken andan egg situation because, as
long as people will understandthat they'll get the aid and
they need to see like a regularentering of food, they won't
stop looting the aid and the UNare saying, no, we will enter
the aid once the situation willcalm down.
(12:39):
So it's like an endless circle.
It's like an endless circle.
I think part of it is what yousaw in the Israel statements on,
for instance, the humanitarianpause, when it has no real
significance, because thehumanitarian pause are mainly in
areas that the IDF doesn'toperate to begin with, but it
mainly to show the populationyes, the aid will enter.
(12:59):
You can you know the stress canrelease.
If you'll just let the aidenter, then you'll get the food.
So it's a very complicatedsituation.
I don't think it happened atonce.
I don't think it happened onone day.
Like Shira said, it's been anongoing situation.
But until recent weeks, whenthis became between Israel and
(13:21):
the EU and now with the US,between Israel and the EU and
now with the US, it was moreIsrael and the UN in an endless
blame game on who's right andwho's to blame on why the
humanitarian response isn'tfunctioning as it should.
Shanie (13:35):
Yeah, I want to pull on this mistrust thread because
there's quite a lot offinger-pointing here from the
Israelis and from the UN and aidagencies and everybody else
involved Rightfully so, perhaps.
Israeli officials haverepeatedly argued that the
primary cause of the aid crisisis the UN's failure to
distribute the aid already inthe Strip and, of course, hamas'
hijacking of aid.
(13:56):
They also point to the you knowthe many UN trucks that sit on
the inside of the Gaza borderand don't get distributed, etc.
Then we had the New York Timespublishing a piece last week
claiming that there's no proofthat Hamas was actually looting
from the UN.
So I'd love for you to addressthat claim specifically.
But I also want to know whatboth of these entities Israel
and the UN and other aidagencies can do and we'll get to
(14:18):
the GHF later to be betteringthe situation on the ground.
Or (14:24):
Dara, you want to start, or should I?
Okay, so I think, to be honest,there is enough fault for
everyone to go around.
So it's not one thing, it's notone magic solution that someone
can say here is the missingpiece and that's it.
I think you know all parties inthis have something to blame or
(14:45):
they couldn't have done better.
I do want to say and point outthat this war has been going on
for two years.
It's a very intense fightingand the systems are exhausted.
So a lot of things that weretried before and maybe they are
still relevant, you know thepeople are saying we already
(15:05):
tried that.
So there is like a fatigue inthe people, in the system.
It's a very intense situation.
So I think that's part of it.
There is a lack of trustbetween the sides.
You know Israel and the UN haslike a very long experience, a
bad experience between the sides, and there's a lack of trust.
(15:25):
Putting in addition to that theUNRWA campaign that made all
the UN agencies kind of fall inline of saying we stand behind
UNRWA while to be honest,they're not really that
supportive at UNRWA.
But the fact that UNRWA, kindof you know, fell apart in the
humanitarian structure that theyhad kind of made the rest of
(15:48):
the agencies stepping in.
They weren't prepared for thatand no humanitarian system can
hold too many people for twoyears, 100% of the population,
100% of the time.
So that is a burden on thehumanitarian community and,
let's be honest, countries don'tstand in line to give endless
(16:09):
funds to this humanitariansupport.
So there is a lot of criticismon the UN and want to provide
humanitarian aid or that they'reusing this in order to pressure
Israel.
I don't share that assessmentwith some Israeli officials.
(16:32):
There are issues like thedeconfliction mechanisms that
are challenging throughout thiswar.
We've been hearing about itconstantly.
It is a challenge, thebreakdown of the law and order
inside of Gaza.
That is part of the Israel.
You know it's part of the goalsof the war to dismantle Hamas
governing capabilities.
(16:53):
That equivalents to thebreakdown of law and order.
So Israel could do more,especially on the routes and the
securing of the routes insideof Gaza.
There are some bureaucraticmechanisms that can be lifted in
this, but basically thefundamental part is that there
(17:16):
is no trust between the sides.
So that makes it very hard tocome up with new solutions.
And I'll add to that that thereis no real UN leadership here.
The UN shift changed fivehumanitarian coordinators in two
years.
There is no temporary specialenvoy to the Middle East, so you
(17:36):
don't see a leadership here.
The people on the ground areleft and they are very motivated
but they're exhausted, but theydon't have the backup of their
leaders.
You don't see high level UNofficials arriving to the area.
They're staying in New York,they're giving statements,
they're having like verysupportive tweets, but they're
(17:57):
not here, they're not on theground, they're not addressing.
There are things that thepeople that are stationed in
Israel, you know, decisions thatthey can make and they need
their higher level support andthat discussion, that very high
level strategic discussion,doesn't take place.
Unfortunately, and I thinkthat's part of the problem and
(18:21):
maybe the answer is also there.
Shanie (18:23):
Thank you for that.
I just want to first of allencourage everyone to keep
sending questions in the chatand I'll try to incorporate them
.
I'll just quickly address one,which is the question of why
Israel is responsible for aid.
I want to clarify that thisisn't aid being bought and sent
in by Israel.
It's being facilitated byIsrael, which is the power on
the ground.
This aid is sent from othercountries typically.
So, moving on from that, theGaza Humanitarian Foundation was
(18:46):
created to kind of bypass thisbig issue between Hamas and the
UN and Israel.
I don't know if it was verysuccessful in doing that and I
would love to hear more fromboth of you on its success and
its failures and help usunderstand the many really
terrible instances of Gazansbeing killed at the aid
distribution sites that many ofus have been seeing in the media
over the past few months.
Shira (19:16):
I'll try to be diplomatic about it and I'll let Orr take
the heat for GHF.
I just want to go back tosomething that Orr said, that it
is what you would call acollective failure, the
Ghazi-Munitarian crisis.
It's a collective failure andthis blame game and it's so
frustrating to me.
The 22 months in, we'rebasically in the same
conversation Israel blames theUN, the UN blames Israel.
(19:40):
There's donor fatigue, whichexisted back then.
There are all these issues thatare just becoming worse and
unfortunately, we've crossedthis tipping point, and you know
, the problem with tippingpoints is that once you pass it,
then there's almost no way back.
But we've been in the sameconversation.
Gaza is a man-made crisis.
Right, there are lots.
(20:01):
There could be many technicalsolutions.
That starts with the politicalwill of everyone and it's the
functional relationship with theUN, which you don't have, which
come from the Secretary General.
That, by the the way, there areissues with the Secretary
General in the UN that havenothing to do with Israel.
There are complaints about himand now there are issues there
the Israeli.
What I would think is a veryimmature approach that anyone
(20:24):
that says something bad aboutIsrael is not welcome in the
room for a conversation.
It's very hard to find someonewho doesn't say something bad
about Israel at the moment, withlack of NGOs and structures,
but this all is a governanceissue.
It's the fact of law and orderand breaking down the systems.
What happened in Gaza is not,you know, an earthquake or an
(20:46):
emergency.
You went in and you broke downthe government, and this
government was, whether we likeit or not, it was a Hamas de
facto government system thatIsrael helped create this
monster right and policies withits creation initially we're
talking about decades agohelping guiding everyone that
(21:09):
Hamas is the least badalternative and that it should
remain in governance right,deterred and weakened, whatever
those things are.
And so and he went in and UNRWAwas not just a humanitarian
organization, it wasintergovernmental in the system
and when you break it, you haveno system.
So you know, we can talk abouttrucks and meals and I'll
(21:31):
connect this to Jeff in a secondbut the idea that humanitarian
you know there are practices andI'm not claiming to be a
humanitarian, you know or I cantalk about the technical stuff,
but there's a reason why thehumanitarian community invests
in actual systems to stave offhunger.
You can't count trucks andmeals and calories for 22 months
(21:53):
, and also humanitarian and thisis, you know, it's so much more
than just hunger.
I know the pictures of thosegone people.
It's really, I mean,heartbreaking to see and that's
why all the focus is.
But you know, there's 90% ofthe population, or close to 90%,
is displaced and washed andsanitation and disease.
And like I mean there's 90% ofthe population or close to 90%
is displaced and washed andsanitation and disease, and like
(22:13):
I mean there's a wholebreakdown of anything and not to
mention dignity, god'sHumanitarian Foundation.
I'll just get into this.
There were a lot of reports inUS Press Washington Post, new
York Times I encourage others ifyou want to read sort of the
gossip behind it and the peoplethat are involved.
I'm not going to talk anythingabout the proper governance of
(22:35):
this structure, but the idea was, with Israel saying something
is not working here.
The UN is too principled.
They're holier than the Pope.
They cannot stand the thoughtof delivering aid under IDF
security.
They don't have their ownsecurity.
They are used to work withHamas.
We don't allow that.
(22:55):
So there was really a conundrumand this idea of saying like
maybe we can work with privatecompanies.
You know, I think they haven'tread the memo of like the
privatization of aid didn't workso well in Iraq and other
places.
There are a lot of people thatdid this stuff in Iraq that are
involved.
You know, and this idea of somepeople were looking at this sort
of like disruption, let'sdisrupt the system and with
(23:19):
something that is going againsthumanitarian principles, which
is part of the problem.
Humanitarian principles say youbring the aid to the people.
What happened with GHF?
And there's GHF and SRS and inthe interest of time we can't go
into all these details.
But the idea is like we createdistribution centers and people
are going to walk to us andthey're going to walk to us and
(23:39):
they're going to take the boxesof food which we might cut a
better deal on, which they don't, because the UN gets better
prices.
And in this box of food thereare going to be some things that
we're going to tell a storythat it feeds 75 people every
crate and they're going to walkback with those things and cook
whatever the flour andeverything wherever in their
(24:01):
tent.
And this, this doesn't work.
You know, ghf can be a verypartial solution to assisting
people obtain dry food.
For this you need communitykitchens or home kitchens, which
do not exist.
You need so many other things.
You need perishables, you needvegetables, you need vitamins,
(24:21):
you need all these things.
So you don't have.
But the main thing is, whenyou're asking about, it's like I
don't want to talk about whoshot and there's clearly way too
many arms around GHF.
But what happens is that, as wepredicted before and Orna you
know, there are a lot of peoplethat thought there's going to be
.
When people walk to a placethat is far, and they walk for a
(24:43):
long time in extreme heat andthey're very weak, and they get
there and it's open or not openand there's limited aid being
delivered, of course there'sgoing to be a stampede.
Of course they're going to jumpon the aid.
Of course it's like HungerGames right, the strongest, the
fittest and the bravest jump.
There are warning shots.
Warning shots are actuallyreally dangerous because you
know things happen.
(25:04):
A lot of them are warning shots.
By the way, in Iraq I know themilitary was forbidden from
using warning shots because itcould lead to casualties.
Hamas doesn't like it and soyou'll have people jumping on
the aid.
It's not even like properdistribution.
There's no registration.
We know the same people, orit's thought that the same
(25:26):
people might come every day,collect aid and resell it in the
market.
It's not equitable and so it'sa complete failure.
Now, I'm not saying that inaddition to other things, it
cannot be a supplemental thing,but this idea that Israel and
I'll refer to this some Israelisthought this would be the best
invention since sliced bread.
Shanie (25:58):
And it proves that it doesn't work.
Shira (25:59):
In addition to all these, deaths around it that can be
attributed to various elements.
Or (26:02):
I'm sure Orr has more things to say about GHF.
Talk about GHF for the regionof their existence.
But I will say that when ahuman-charm response is planned,
the focus point is the mostvulnerable population, so it's
the pregnant women, the nursingwomen, the children under the
age of five, the elderly, thedisabled.
(26:24):
This concept, in no shape orform, will address their needs.
So there is no way that apregnant woman can walk five
miles.
Let's say that she'll actuallymanage to get this box that
weighs 22 kilos, and once sheleaves, someone will take it
(26:52):
from her.
And these are things we keep onhearing from people in Gaza.
So if someone actually managedto get to a distribution site,
which they usually open oroperate for an hour max, because
people just rush in, grabwhatever they can and run back
out, there's nothing left forthose most vulnerable.
(27:13):
And that's the key element thatthe UN are saying against this
concept that you're sendingpeople to an active fighting
zone in an area controlled by,I'll say, the counter army,
fighting, and people aresupposed to take the food.
It's dry food.
(27:33):
They're going back, they'rebeing looted on the way, so they
can only take whatever they canJust imagine carrying.
You know.
I remember in the beginning,one of the images, pictures they
published was a handicappedperson standing with a box and I
(27:54):
tried to think, okay, how is hegoing to carry that?
I mean, he can barely stand.
He has a box, and then what?
So, even if the concept, likeShira said that there was a need
to kind of shake thehumanitarian system because it
didn't really work Even beforethe ceasefire those of you who
(28:14):
remember there was alwayscomplaints and it wasn't very
functioning.
So the idea was that we needsomething different.
I think we actually neededsomething different.
I think that wasn't what weneeded.
It was planned badly, it wasimplemented even worse, and the
fact that now it became this youknow, it's like the part of the
(28:38):
blame game of GHF sayingthey're part of the blame game
against the UN, but I don't seea difference.
There is no difference betweenpeople jumping on a truck,
looting the truck, and thenpeople jumping on the food boxes
and looting them, becausethere's no registration here and
here.
So no one really knows how manypeople are being fed in Gaza.
(29:00):
Not the UN, not GHF.
So the fact that GHF publishednumbers of meals, that's great,
but no one knows how manybeneficiaries they have because
they have no registration.
The same for the UN.
So when you're asking how manypeople are hungry in Gaza, no
one knows, because no one knowshow many people are being fed,
how many people are being servedwith humanitarian support.
(29:25):
I will put aside the UAE thatare basically the only one
managing some sort offunctioning humanitarian
response in Gaza.
They don't get any of thecredit.
Talking about credits, buttheir humanitarian response in
Gaza, I think Shira, I thinkyou'll agree, but it's the most
functioning humanitarianresponse at the moment.
(29:47):
They're doing it very quietlybut they're managing.
But again, they will never beable to do too many people and
they don't intend to.
So that's also part of it, butit is part of the playing game.
This concept never worked.
I don't see a reason why itwould work in the most
(30:08):
complicated humanitarianoperation in the world.
No one has conducted ahumanitarian operation in such
intense fighting area.
Never happened.
I don't see why it will succeedhere.
Thank you for that Before I getto the next question.
Shanie (30:24):
We do have a lot of folks who reminded me and I
don't want to take for granted,perhaps I get to the next
question.
We do have a lot of folks whoreminded me and I don't want to
take for granted perhaps I didthat, of course, this entire war
did begin on October 7th withthe horrific massacre by Hamas
and taking of hostages who doremain in captivity to this day,
and they are part ofexperiencing whatever starvation
is happening in Gaza.
Is, we would assume you know,even more so amongst them.
(30:47):
Is, we would assume you know,even more so amongst them, and
Shami, I think again.
Shira (30:54):
I can't believe, 22 months after, we still need to
say that Hamas is a barbaricterrorist organization.
What they did on October 7th,what they did before, the fact
that Gaza was what it was andthe fact that the conditions in
Gaza were pretty awful, alsobefore October 7th, for the
people there are a result of thefact there was a terrorist
(31:16):
organization controlling andsacrificing.
You know they're hurtingIsraelis, but they're also
holding their own people, youknow, victim to their cruelty
and criminality.
So that goes without saying.
And of course, we understandthat if the population in Gaza
suffers from hunger, ourhostages are in an extremely,
(31:39):
extremely, extremely, far worsecondition.
So I mean there's no, I'm sorry, just I think from the
conversation here in Israel thatof course I don't feel like we
have to remind us, but this isdefinitely acknowledged.
It does not mean that we cannottalk about all the other things
that came after October 7th.
Shanie (31:57):
Absolutely, and for those of you who follow Israel
Policy Forum, you know that wespend a lot of time speaking
about every aspect of this war,most notably how it's impacting
those on the grounds in Israeland, of course, the many
soldiers dying, and this is anemergency webinar for a very
specific issue that's coming upa lot for many of us this week.
A lot of folks are alsomentioning and Shira I'll take
this to you directly because youmight have more flexibility A
(32:20):
lot of people want to know veryspecifically about the New York
Times op-ed.
They want to know is it truethat there is no evidence that
Hamas is looting from UN trucks?
That very specific question.
I know you both addressed thesense of lawlessness that has
led to looting, which makes alot of sense, but there's a very
specific claim about Hamas hereand looting of UN trucks
specifically, and I would loveto get your response to that.
Shira (32:41):
So I mean, I don't know if Orr can comment on it, I
don't know.
I have a lot of respect for theNew York Times that there were
(33:03):
two IDF senior officersanonymously.
So I'm pretty sure a journalistactually spoke to IDF officers.
I don the officers whatever,how many they interviewed.
But do you have evidence forHamas stealing aid?
And officers say no, well, wedon't have evidence.
And this is the headline, what Ican say, at least I know I've
(33:25):
heard, okay, I'm not going to gointo the details heard okay,
not from.
I'm not going to go into thedetails.
First of all, there aredifferent types of looting right
in Gaza, by Hamas and by justcriminal gangs, and there's
what's referred to this publiclooting in terms of like, how
everyone divides.
There is intelligence thatsuggests that Hamas benefits
from aid in not just like eatingright.
(33:46):
It's not the fact that Hamasmilitants eat food, it's more
than the fact that they can useit to earn money through a
complex network, exchanges indifferent countries and other
things.
My understanding is that the UN, because it controls the whole,
what you would call, I guess inEnglish you'd say right, oh,
value chain, the whole valuechain from like donor, from
(34:09):
where they source their stuff toto the area, exactly to the
point of distribution.
The UN has their owndistribution sites in the
community.
It's less vulnerable to Hamasexploitation it does not mean
Hamas doesn't benefit from itbut it's less vulnerable than
some NGO that is connected to anIslamic I don't know what, an
(34:33):
exchange in Istanbul and cryptohere, and it gets to somewhere.
And I think this also goes tosomething that we have to talk
about Israel in terms of itsinternational.
I'm not a legal expert, but Ithink Israel still argues that
during because we're still in awar situation, israel is not
responsible for the populationitself.
Israel's responsibility is,under international humanitarian
(34:55):
law, is to facilitate, toenable the aid.
So for a long long time Israelsaid our responsibility is make
sure those trucks come to thecrossing.
The moment they enter thecrossing right on the other side
, it's the UN's problem, by theway they do it.
They say it again today andthey were like no one cared.
It's sort of like what happensfrom the Gaza side of the
cross-sink to how it gets to thebeneficiary.
(35:18):
So there's sort of like, on theone hand, the legal commitment.
The other hand is what isactually happening and how do we
monitor and how much we controlit.
I don't know happening and howdo we monitor and how much we
control it.
I don't know.
Maybe I'll work and elaborateon the data, but I do think the
UN's route is not foolproof butit's less vulnerable.
That's my understanding.
(35:38):
I don't know or what do youthink.
I don't know if you can commenton it.
Or (35:43):
I won't comment on that, but I will add that we need to keep
in mind that there is adistinction between UNRWA and
Hamas involvement in UNRWA'ssystem and the rest of the UN
agencies.
We don't see UNRWA.
Despite their very activesocial media activities, they
(36:07):
are not that involved in thehumanitarian response on the
ground in Gaza.
So even if we did see more ofHamas involvement in UNRWA's aid
distribution partially, notnecessarily benefiting
economically, but did use it asa governing force economically,
(36:34):
but did use it as a governingforce and, like Shira said, the
UN, the rest of the agency'ssystem is less, it's more
controlled in that manner.
But that's all I'll say.
Shanie (36:45):
Thank you.
There are a lot of commentsmore than questions in here, but
important ones, noting for methe lack of clarity, that there
is such confusion, and, I think,the fact that neither of you
has a really concise answer,which is important because it
adds so much more nuance anddepth to the answers.
It's necessary because therearen't really short answers or
soundbites to any of thesequestions, which is, I think,
(37:06):
important to say that there's alot of complexity here amidst
all of the tragedy.
I want to move towards thequestion of pressure on Hamas in
the context of hostagenegotiations.
The escalation of thehumanitarian crisis in Gaza sort
of coincided with this apparentbreakdown in the more recent
hostage negotiations.
How are they related?
Because on the one hand, youcan imagine there is some kind
of strategy of trying to startHamas, or rather limit aid as a
(37:31):
way of pressuring Hamas, but onthe other hand, it doesn't seem
that Hamas is really impacted atall by what happens or the
level of suffering to Gazans onthe ground.
So there's a question of towhat extent this strategy is
meaningful.
Can you kind of connect thosetwo issues for us?
Or (37:48):
I think one of the questions today is who is Hamas?
So in the beginning of the warthere was a clear structure of
Hamas.
There was a leadership in Gaza,there was a leadership abroad.
There was a very clearconnection between the two.
This very intense fightingrightly so, and kind of
(38:10):
dismantled the majority of the Imean the majority of the
leaders in Gaza are killed.
So when you talk about Hamas,the interests are so spread out
that the leaders in at themoment in Doha, even though they
just left, doesn't necessarily,you know, share the same
(38:30):
interest as the people in Gaza.
And even in Gaza, who is thereto left, to make the decision?
There's always.
I mean, I think the only leftsenior official is a Zadin who's
, you know, comes from a veryextreme military wing.
So when you say Hamas, then whodo you refer to?
I don't think that thehumanitarian pressure on the
(38:53):
population is a big concern tothem.
Yes, they would want to see itas part of end the war and a
ceasefire, that they will beable to go back to the community
and say, here, this is what webrought.
I don't think that's the numberone topic go back to the
community and say, here, this iswhat we brought.
I don't think that's the numberone topic, which what Israel
(39:15):
kind of hoped that thehumanitarian pressure will kind
of force Hamas to get a betterceasefire.
I do think that what we sawkind of backfired because there
was more pressure on Israel toend the war.
That kind of made Hamas say,okay, we can keep on going, so
we can come from a strongerposition to this, because Israel
is under so much pressureinternationally that they will
(39:39):
need to be the weaker part ofthe discussion, while Israel
kind of hoping that thehumanitarian pressure will
change the equation.
It didn't.
So I think that's also part ofit that we fail to see or fail
to understand whether or notHamas really cares about the
(40:01):
humanitarian response in Gazaand we I think it's very clear
that they don't.
Shira (40:08):
Yeah, I'll just want to add to this that of course Hamas
, they don't care about this.
They never like the civilianpart of the job anyway, even
with the de facto governance andso this.
But I think and it really goesto who is in Hamas today and the
decision-making processes butthere's a bigger issue, right?
But there's a bigger issue,right, israel's war aims have
(40:31):
been pretty much justsloganeering, right?
A complete defeat of Hamas.
You know this complete defeat.
I mean there are war goals thatare dismantling Hamas as a
governing authority, as militaryauthority, and bringing back
the hostages, the first two.
You could argue that Israelachieved is no longer an army.
Right, it's a guerrillaorganization, but it's not an
(40:55):
army, it's not a governingauthority.
At the moment, the hostagesmost are back, but we still have
50 hostages alive and dead inGaza.
But arguably, israel could tella winning story, just like it
did in Lebanon and in Gaza.
But arguably, israel could tella winning story like, just like
he did in Lebanon and in Iran,where the military achievement
is imperfect.
But because Israel is stickingto this idea of like, we will
(41:18):
not talk about the day after,until after, and there has been
no plan, no way tooperationalize even what Israel
is saying.
Right, it's like one Hamas gone, we want an exile.
Okay, can you name 10 people inHamas that you want to exile?
Do you want to give them thishonor of exiling them?
Do we have 10?
(41:38):
I mean, I'm serious, these arereal questions.
Do you want disarmament of whom?
From whom?
Who is the day after?
Not PA, but yes, fatah clans.
Not PA, but yes, fatah clans.
Nod, nod, yes, no.
I mean and this leaves us with abigger issue that there is sort
of a theoretical threat onHamas that Israel is going to
occupy Gaza.
(41:58):
Right, there's a hole now.
If Hamas doesn't decide, ifHamas doesn't go back to the
negotiations now and doesn'tbecome more flexible in the
negotiation, israel is going togo and annex territory and
occupy Gaza.
But I got to tell you thatHamas has been pretty good about
reading the Israeli public andthere's no appetite for this.
(42:20):
So I'm not saying they'recalling the Israeli bluff
because maybe this will beimplemented, but it's really not
what Israelis want.
I mean, there's a minority inIsrael wants that, but it's a
very short minority.
I mean, I'm not going to speakabout the IDF, but it's not the
IDF's preferred choice course ofaction.
This is not what they want.
There are immense costs to thiseconomic, in human lives and
(42:46):
diplomatic that Israel cannotassume the burden of.
I think of full occupation andmilitary rule, and Israeli
society doesn't want that.
So I think, from Hamas'perspective, if Israel's threat
is not credible in their eyes,israel is undergoing this
diplomatic tsunami, beingtreated like I don't know, you
(43:06):
know ways that I've never seenthis and haven't anticipated.
So Hamas really benefits fromthis right and the fact that
Hamas is like what is our bestchoice?
Anyway?
Who are we?
It's not like we're seeking arefuge out.
So in that regard, it's notsurprising that they're
toughening their position and Ithink we Israelis we're in a
(43:30):
bind.
We have to find there needs tobe a way out of this and not
this other way, because then notjust the humanitarian crisis,
but so many other things aregoing to fall onto Israel's laps
.
Shanie (43:45):
I'm going to ask this.
This is the first question I'masking verbatim, because I think
it was very succinct who isactually in charge of picking up
the aid from the truck sittingjust inside the border?
Or (44:00):
In an ideal situation if things were functioning smoothly
what would happen with allthose trucks and all of that aid
?
So each truck that is sent intoGaza, there is someone that
bought it or paid for it or gotit.
So whoever sent the truck, it'slike a two-way coordination.
So you coordinate the trucks tothe crossing from the Israeli
side and the same guy that sentit, or the same organization,
(44:26):
same figure, same entity is theone responsible for picking it
up.
So when the UN is sending 30trucks, they are supposed to
collect the 30 trucks.
Part of the aid that all of ussaw on the ground on the
Palestinian side of Kerem Shalomin the recent briefings.
Part of it is the UN.
It's very clear.
You can see the logo on it andsome of them are not.
(44:47):
Some of them are from otherinternational organizations
operating in Gaza.
So the process is that if yousend a truck from Israel to the
processing, you're sending atruck to come from Gaza to pick
it up.
It's like back to back.
That's it.
It's very simple.
(45:08):
So there's no one responsible.
Each organization isresponsible for them.
By the way, it's part of theirresponsibility for their donors.
So if someone donated eitherfunds or kinds to an
organization, it's theirresponsibility towards their
donors to than it sounds.
It's more complicated in termsof security and the confliction
(45:34):
on the way, but the process iseasier than it sounds.
Shanie (45:41):
Thinking more about the political side of this.
There are a lot of questionshere regarding to what extent
decisions around aid arepolitically motivated on the
Israeli side, and I'm wonderingif you can speak to that a
little bit, shira, obviouslythere are a lot of factors at
play.
I would imagine politics is oneof them amongst many,
militarily and otherwise.
Can you address that?
Shira (46:04):
I mean, I think first and foremost, it's an ideological.
It's an ideological politicalquestion you have to understand.
After October 7, israelis haveno empathy to what's happening
in Gaza and especially when thehostages you know when there's
still hostages there and the waythey were treated according to
(46:26):
reports.
So there's this issue with themedia self-censoring here, right
, and we hear all the time thatthe editors say that our viewers
don't want to watch it.
So what's even in Gaza?
And the fact that, just likeIsraelis I mean of course you
can go on social media and takethe effort, but you know
Israelis are in their echochambers and don't see this.
There is a whole discussion andthere's really a tension
(46:49):
between the fact that it'spolitically, it's a very
unpopular issue inside Israeland it goes in a reverse
correlation to what the worldthinks, the diplomatic community
.
I can tell you that I went backjust past week looking at
decisions that had to do withhumanitarian assistance when
(47:09):
after October 7th.
So you know the beginning, whenI think it was late November,
late October when aid startedgoing in through Rafah, but when
aid started going throughIsrael which I think was around
or probably remembers thehistory, but around December
2023, or after the firstceasefire hostage agreement and
(47:31):
there were movements like theTzavtasha, the Snine Warrant
movement of Israeli civiliansthat were blocking aid convoys
going to Gaza using violencearound Jerusalem.
I mean it was that contentious.
The idea was like why would weprovide aid to Gaza after what
(47:53):
they did to us and as long as westill have hostages there?
It's also there's the fact thatIsraelis don't know that it's
not really Israeli aid.
I mean, we can talk about howmuch Israel is now paying for
some of these things and thereseems to be that Israel is
paying for some of it, but backthen the was not the question.
It was just about enabling andnot understanding Israel's
(48:15):
commitments.
And you know, we say now aboutSmotrich and Ben-Vir, obviously
the most hawkish members ofNetanyahu's government, but it's
not just them.
I mean, you hear across theboard in Israel, at the
beginning it was Yoav Galand,and then it was even a a former
commander, general Rassan Alian,from Koga, saying that there's
not going to be a water in Gazaand nothing's going to, no food
(48:38):
is going to go, and the factthat a lot of people say, wait,
are we enabling now humanitariancrisis without getting anything
in return?
Right, because thishumanitarian component, and a
surge in humanitarian aidusually comes, or had come
previously, in connection withceasefire agreements.
So why are we giving this?
So this is so political and theconsiderations are so political
(48:59):
and the fact that Netanyahuhimself, who did like so many
180s on this, right in responseto.
I can give you an example therewas a tweet by Naftali Bennett
of some armed guy on a truck afew weeks ago and then Israel
decided to shut down the littleaid that went in to the north of
Gaza back then.
But now again, the fact thatNetanyahu makes this dramatic
(49:21):
decision on a Saturday Shabbat,only to keep away coalition
members who are not going toattend, only to keep away
coalition members who are notgoing to attend, because this
just tells you how contentiousit is.
So extremely, extremely,extremely political, which is
really complicated, which isreally a problem, because it's a
serious issue and the politicshave to be just one
(49:45):
consideration.
It can't be all of it.
Shanie (49:49):
Howard, do you have anything to add on that?
Or (49:52):
I'll just add that for like a year and a half, israel said
that the humanitarian policy, orwhatever humanitarian
assistance goes into Gaza, isbecause of the US administration
, pressure and demands.
So part of it is now a lot ofpeople in Israel, both from the
(50:15):
public and also in politics, aresaying OK, it's a different
administration.
Israel has the support of thiscurrent administration to do,
you know, whatever you want inGaza.
So why are we resuming the aidafter the ceasefire broke?
So it was like in thetransition period that the
ceasefire occurred when theinstitution changed and
(50:38):
therefore after the ceasefirethere was no humanitarian aid.
So there was an anticipation inIsrael to say, okay, this is
the golden card, this is what wecan play with, and why are we
using the humanitarian card fornothing?
So that's also something, and Iheard Smoltysh today saying
(51:04):
that there is a reason, there'sa bigger reason for him to
accept what is happening nowwith the humanitarian, because
something big is happening.
So everyone's trying to framewhy the shift in the
humanitarian policy happened onSaturday policy happen on
(51:28):
Saturday.
Shanie (51:29):
I think this is probably going to be our last question.
I'll ask Orr to take it first,which is in an ideal scenario.
What do we do going forward?
What does the distribution looklike?
How do we alleviate the crisis?
You can speak about any actorsinvolved the UN, ghf, israel.
I mean, there's a lot Hamas cando, so maybe you can leave them
out or include.
And then, shira, I'll ask youto answer this afterwards and
then tie it to a broader visionfor Gaza and the
(51:51):
Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Or (51:54):
I really think that this requires a joint coordination
and a different approach by allparties.
So keep on doing what we'vebeen doing for the last 22
months.
It isn't going anywhere.
We're still using the samecards, we're still playing the
(52:16):
same methods and mechanisms thatwe tried and it failed.
I think that the UN needs toimplement the full scope of the
humanitarian clusters, with realprofessional leaders that have
the power to make decisions.
Diverting aid not necessarilythe UN aid, but aid in general
(52:36):
there's a UN security resolutionon this and the fact that the
UN keeps on fighting Israel andwhether or not Hamas is
diverting aid isn't helping, andI think Israeli insistence of
(53:01):
using the same route isn'tworking.
The deconfliction mechanismfailed completely.
There is no trust.
I think we need a grown-up, aresponsible grown-up in the room
, and there is no one at themoment to get the sides together
and say okay, you need to sitdown and this all needs to work.
(53:23):
I think that the Americans arethe only one that can impose
such a thing on Israel and, tobe honest, at the moment,
there's no one in the USadministration that deals with
humanitarian especially now thatit's no longer USAID but
there's no one that actuallydeals with humanitarian and
therefore I'm taking intoaccount that this GHF thing is
(53:44):
like a given, mainly forpolitical reasons in Israel, but
I think there is a way, becausethe logistics of Gaza failed.
I think that this is a strongside, or and we'll have new
(54:06):
people and people that canactually make a decision and not
necessarily, like Shira said,the decisions always come like
at the last moment, likeSaturday morning we're saying
we're going to, you know, changethe humanitarian concept.
Saturday evening it'simplemented.
There is even not enough timefor the soldier in the end to
get the orders, but you alreadysee the trucks moving.
(54:29):
So I think we need to, likepause for a minute, you know,
sit, come up with a plan.
I think that there is.
Like I said, I think the UAEcan play a significant role in
this, definitely the Egyptians,definitely the Jordanians.
I think the Abraham Accords canplay a significant role in this
(54:49):
.
I think we're missing,partially because we're so
obsessed with the blame game onwho's to fault and, in the end,
the people of Gaza are suffering.
Shira (55:02):
Yeah, I'll just add to what Orr says.
We can talk about specifictechnical issues, right, some
customs pressures and openingmore routes and this, and
vouchers, cash for works andother systems, but it's just not
disconnected from the bigproblem of what Israel is
(55:23):
planning to do with Gaza,because the Arabs and you hear
it also in the Emiratis they'renumber one, despite what
President Trump said, that noother country puts more money
into Gaza.
It's very not.
It's factually not true.
The Emiratis have put a lot ofmoney into this way, more than
the United States, by the way,also the Europeans, by the way,
(55:49):
also the Europeans but they'rereluctant to do more without
articulating a vision for theday after in Gaza.
That has to do with thePalestinian governance that is
supported, and then the Arabswill come in.
They have said it.
They have certain conditions,they want an invite and they
want some sort of affiliation toa formal political Palestinian
body, which I know of only one.
But this is where it is anduntil Israel, or if Israel
(56:14):
doesn't want that, it needs tooffer something else.
And because Israel and this issort of the bigger picture I
think there are Israelis hereacross the board who are
clinging on to what they say isPresident Trump's vision for the
voluntary migration of thePalestinians from Gaza.
And they're saying you knowthis would be the.
(56:35):
Eventually they will move rightand then you can do other
things.
And I just saw that PresidentTrump said today that some he
said it's a concept, some peoplefell in love with the idea,
some people haven't.
It's fresh from an hour ago.
Maybe some doesn't want toleave, some of them are leaving,
some wants to leave if they hadan alternative.
(56:56):
At the moment they don't haveone.
So I think a clear message fromthe US that this is really this
will look like a quite feasibleplan would also put Israel's you
throw the ball and we have toplan.
The humanitarian is a strategicissue.
There are technical solutions.
They're not easy where we are,don't get me wrong but first and
foremost it'd have to be partof a much bigger strategic
(57:19):
position of where this is going.
Thank you both so much.
I know you came directly fromyour safe rooms to join us on
this call today, and you both somuch I know.
Shanie (57:24):
you came directly from your safe rooms to join us on
this call today, and we are, ofcourse, all hoping for the
return of the hostages, thealleviation of the humanitarian
crisis and an end to the war andall that comes with it for both
Israelis and Palestinians.
The recording of this webinarwill be posted on the briefings
page of the Israel Policy Forumwebsite.
I, of course, also encourageyou to subscribe to the podcast
Israel Policy Pod.
(57:45):
Sign up to receive the weeklyCopplow column in your email
inbox and visit the IsraelPolicy Forum website for more
insight and analysis from ourteam of experts.
That does include reports on arange of topics that were
discussed today.
Once again, a big thank you toIsrael Policy Forum supporters
who are with us on the calltoday.
Again, I invite the rest of youto join the Israel Policy Forum
family of donors by visitingisraelpolicyforumorg support.
(58:08):
You can also find Israel PolicyForum on Instagram.
Please stay tuned for anannouncement regarding the next
Israel Policy Forum videobriefing.
Until then, thank you again fortuning in and we'll see you
soon.
Hello everyone, thank you for joining us today.
My name is Shini Reichman.
I'm Israel Policy Forum'sDirector of Strategic
Initiatives and the Director ofIPF Atid.
Ipf Atid is our youngprofessionals network, which
informs and empowers the nextgeneration of leaders by
fostering pragmaticconversations around Israel and
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with programming around seven
chapters across North America.
Welcome to those who arejoining us for the first time
(00:30):
and those who are our regularwatchers, as well as all of you
listening on Israel Policy Pod,where we have a recording.
And, of course, a special thankyou to our supporters, who make
it possible for us to producefree, expert analysis and
conversations for ourcommunities.
For the next hour, I'll ask afew questions of our two guests
and we'll also welcome audiencequestions which you can put into
the chat function, and I'mgoing to incorporate as many as
(00:51):
I can throughout this discussion.
This emergency webinar was puttogether in the last 24 hours or
so amid the humanitariancatastrophe in the Gaza Strip.
I'll share IPF's statement onthe crisis in the chat shortly,
in which we advocate for USleadership that facilitates
coordination between the UN,israel and other aid agencies.
We also note the humanitarianneeds of the Gaza Strip cannot
(01:13):
be fully addressed without anend to the war.
Today we'll cover the currenthumanitarian landscape in Gaza
barriers to increasing aid flow,both logistical and political,
what steps can be taken by allparties involved to alleviate
the suffering and how this isall being covered in both
Israeli and international media.
I'm grateful to be joined todayby two experts on these topics.
First we have LieutenantColonel or El-Rom, who's a
(01:36):
former senior officer of COGAT,the Coordination of Government
Activities in the Territories,which is the IDF unit
responsible for overseeing ageof the civilian population in
Gaza and implementing thecivilian policy in the West Bank
, in coordination andcooperation with officials from
defense and government officesin various fields.
In addition to several otherformer leadership positions
within COGAD and the IDF, orrholds a master's in IR and
(01:59):
security studies from Tel AvivUniversity and a master's in
political science and governmentfrom Bar-Ilan Security Studies
from Tel Aviv University andAmbassadors in Political Science
and Government from Bar-Ilan.
We're also joined today by DrShira Efron, who many of you
know, so I'll have a shorter biofor her.
She's our Research Director atIsrael Policy Forum and also the
Diane and Guilford GlazerFoundation Senior Fellow.
She's been advising the UN onissues relating to this, about
the aid in Gaza for many, manyyears.
(02:20):
So, shira, I will start withyou and then we'll move to Orr.
Since the Israel-Hamas warbegan, humanitarian aid has
actually been one of the mostpolitically charged aspects of
the entire conflict, both withinIsrael and in terms of how the
war is perceived among theinternational community.
In the past week, we've seengrowing alarm about the scale of
the crisis in Gaza, includingfrom very mainstream Israeli
(02:42):
voices who have largelyrefrained from speaking up on
the topic until now, mostnotably Amit Segal from Channel
12.
What has changed the past fewweeks or week or so that's led
to this outcry?
Set the stage for us a littlebit.
Shira (02:58):
Hi Shani, hi everyone joining here, and I really thank
Orr for doing this with us.
Just a minor correction I hadadvised the UN years back.
I no longer advise the UN, butthat was on issues pertaining to
Gaza before this war started,actually even before the
previous war.
Guardian of the Walls in 2021.
(03:20):
But to your question so therewere a few things that have
happened recently and I thinkthe media conversation, you know
, the public conversation inIsrael is a topic on its own,
but the outcry here is quitedifferent than it is around the
world.
The debates here are quitedifferent, but there were a few
(03:41):
things that had happened and Ithink we have to go back to
understand that these thingswhile or me correct me.
First of all, there was a senseinside the Israeli defense
establishment and I know thereare talks on denying the fact
that there's hunger andhumanitarian crisis across the
board.
But looking at where Gaza is,based on objective assessment
(04:06):
and the problems associated withthe aid mechanisms that exist
now the Gaza HumanitarianFoundation, ghf it's clearly
there's been objectivechallenges getting aid in to
even more pictures coming out ofGaza that were harder to ignore
(04:26):
and more reports of death fromhunger.
There were a lot of reportspreviously on food insecurity.
There were a lot of threats onfamine that, in the Israeli
mindset at least, did notfulfill.
But there were all these imagesthat were hard to ignore.
(04:48):
But in addition to that, Ithink that what was really
happening is the pressure fromoutside.
So it didn't start fromAmerican pressure.
There was I think it was aboutthree weeks ago or four weeks
ago pressure started coming fromthe Europeans.
The EU, the European Union, isIsrael's number one trading
(05:08):
partner.
It's also the oxygen toIsrael's research and industry
institutions.
Right, everything academic isbasically funded by, or most of
it is funded by, the Europeans.
The aviation agreement, I mean.
Israel is so dependent onEurope and what happened in
Europe is that the EU decided toreassess the association
(05:29):
agreement between Israel and theEU, which is the framework
agreement for Israel'srelationship with the EU.
Now there are countries withinthe EU that are very pro-Israel,
so you can't get to the biggest.
You know sort of the doomsdayscenario of disconnecting.
They started questioning theirrelationship and their
(05:49):
relationship is tied to what wewould call the shared values, a
mutual respect for human rights,and the Europeans and I think
it was the Netherlands that gotthis call to revisit the
assessment basically said thatthey don't think that Israel
respects for human rights, andthis was mostly about Israel's
(06:10):
policy in Gaza.
So already a few weeks ago andI think this was lost on the
media Israel decided to let somefuel tankers go into Gaza and a
few other measurements by theway, also the Palestinian
Authority, but in Ramallah tostave off this pressure.
But then Gideon Saar, theMinister of Foreign Affairs, was
last week by the way, also thePalestinian Authority in
Ramallah to stave off thispressure.
But then Gideon Saar, theminister of foreign affairs, was
last week in Europe and heheard messages from Israel's
(06:31):
friends Germany included, rightthat basically faced him with
the reality of how Israel ispositioned around the world.
In addition to that, we startedhearing more from the US right,
and I was last week inWashington Many of you are in
Washington.
This is a bipartisan issue,whether one side blames Israel
(06:58):
more and others blame Hamas, andyet there's no question this is
in large part Hamas's fault,but no one wants to see those
images from Gaza.
So the pressure started comingfrom the United States, and
we've seen President Trumptalking about it just now again
and doubling up on hisdissatisfaction with the
pictures.
So this all came to a realitywhere Israel was sort of forced
(07:22):
to decide what it was doing andthe timing was not coincidental,
as we were in two and a halfweeks of negotiating a temporary
ceasefire.
There's always like, okay, wecan wait with this decision
because there's going to be aceasefire any moment and then
anyway there's going to be ahumanitarian surge.
But when the negotiations inDoha stopped and didn't look
(07:45):
very promising, israel had to dosomething.
In very classic Israeli policyon Gaza, it was very erratic on
a Saturday morning, right from acomplete yes to no to yes and
no, and all of a sudden Israel,the Air Force, is parachuting,
doing airdrops of UNAID, likereally schizophrenic, if you
(08:07):
will.
Okay, in terms of where thepolicy is, and I'm sure Orr can
elaborate on this.
But there are a few things Now,just on the Israeli media, I
think because of the hostages,because no one in Israel trusts
the UN, because we do have tosay that right, there were so
many warnings that Gaza is onthe verge of famine several
(08:28):
times in those wars Israelisquestion, and because, unlike
the rest of the world, they havenot been seeing those images
from Gaza until now.
They keep.
I can't tell you and probablyor can answer this.
I can't tell you how manyquestions I get a day from very
serious people.
Is there real hunger?
It's not a Hamas campaign.
(08:49):
This hungry kid is actually theskinny kid is actually from
Yemen.
So this is still a debate oflike why are we doing this?
Why do we have to give themfood?
What are we doing?
It's not exactly the outcrythat you are not in our name
kind of campaign.
Still, it is with differentparts of the population, but I
(09:10):
don't think it's the Israelimainstream at the moment.
Shanie (09:13):
Thanks for that, shira.
Let's move to you, or if youcan add anything around that.
I mean, israelis are very goodat dismissing international
criticism historically, and so Iknow that there's been ramping
up criticism, even from Israel'sallies, but again there is a
tendency to say it's propaganda.
They are listening to all ofthese false reports from the UN
and other aid agencies, so whatare you seeing so like?
Or (09:36):
Shira said thanks for having me.
But, as Shira said, the UN indifferent shapes and forms being
frying wolf from, let's say,december 23.
You can see reports from the UNon starvation and nutrition and
how Gaza is on the break of theserious humanitarian crisis in
the world, and ever since wekeep on hearing another IPC
(10:00):
report, another IPC report andnothing happens.
So that's part of why Israel issaying, okay, the UN are just
fine through what Hamas issaying.
And partially it is because,when you look on the UN data
that they are sharing, they'reactually relying on the Ministry
of Health of Hamas because theydon't have any alternative data
and while Israel fails topresent alternative data, those
(10:22):
are the only numbers people aretalking about.
So when the Ministry of Healthare saying 60,000 killed in Gaza
, no one has a different numberto share, rather than say these
are Hamas numbers.
So this is part of the Israeliposition of saying that the UN
choose Hamas sides on thenarrative and therefore we are
(10:46):
treating the narrative as so, asit is Hamas narrative.
And, like Shira said, thediscussion was whether or not
the images are real, whether ornot the picture came from Yemen,
and not necessarily addressingthe core issue on whether or not
enough food is entering Gaza,whether or not enough food is
(11:07):
entering Gaza, whether or notenough food is being distributed
.
And part of the reasons why theIsraeli system takes it more
seriously in the recent weeks isbecause there is a problem.
The GHF mechanism, while somepeople in Israel thought that
this will be the game changer ofthe war, doesn't scale up.
I mean, I can argue on thenumbers that they are presenting
(11:30):
, but even if they did provide100 million meals, like they say
, they don't have the number ofhow many beneficiaries, like how
many people that actuallyaddressed.
And there are 2 million peoplein Gaza.
So that's definitely not enough.
And when the UN are unable andthe rest of the international
organizations are unable to sendfood into Gaza and I think all
(11:54):
of us saw the images of peoplehovering the trucks, you know
the trucks can't even move.
So the UN, and it's like anendless circle, because then the
donors go back to the UN andsay we won't support or we won't
fund aid that is just beinglooted.
So the UN saying okay, if we'regoing to risk our donations,
(12:17):
we're going to halt.
So and it's like a chicken andan egg situation because, as
long as people will understandthat they'll get the aid and
they need to see like a regularentering of food, they won't
stop looting the aid and the UNare saying, no, we will enter
the aid once the situation willcalm down.
(12:39):
So it's like an endless circle.
It's like an endless circle.
I think part of it is what yousaw in the Israel statements on,
for instance, the humanitarianpause, when it has no real
significance, because thehumanitarian pause are mainly in
areas that the IDF doesn'toperate to begin with, but it
mainly to show the populationyes, the aid will enter.
(12:59):
You can you know the stress canrelease.
If you'll just let the aidenter, then you'll get the food.
So it's a very complicatedsituation.
I don't think it happened atonce.
I don't think it happened onone day.
Like Shira said, it's been anongoing situation.
But until recent weeks, whenthis became between Israel and
(13:21):
the EU and now with the US,between Israel and the EU and
now with the US, it was moreIsrael and the UN in an endless
blame game on who's right andwho's to blame on why the
humanitarian response isn'tfunctioning as it should.
Shanie (13:35):
Yeah, I want to pull on this mistrust thread because
there's quite a lot offinger-pointing here from the
Israelis and from the UN and aidagencies and everybody else
involved Rightfully so, perhaps.
Israeli officials haverepeatedly argued that the
primary cause of the aid crisisis the UN's failure to
distribute the aid already inthe Strip and, of course, hamas'
hijacking of aid.
(13:56):
They also point to the you knowthe many UN trucks that sit on
the inside of the Gaza borderand don't get distributed, etc.
Then we had the New York Timespublishing a piece last week
claiming that there's no proofthat Hamas was actually looting
from the UN.
So I'd love for you to addressthat claim specifically.
But I also want to know whatboth of these entities Israel
and the UN and other aidagencies can do and we'll get to
(14:18):
the GHF later to be betteringthe situation on the ground.
Or (14:24):
Dara, you want to start, or should I?
Okay, so I think, to be honest,there is enough fault for
everyone to go around.
So it's not one thing, it's notone magic solution that someone
can say here is the missingpiece and that's it.
I think you know all parties inthis have something to blame or
(14:45):
they couldn't have done better.
I do want to say and point outthat this war has been going on
for two years.
It's a very intense fightingand the systems are exhausted.
So a lot of things that weretried before and maybe they are
still relevant, you know thepeople are saying we already
(15:05):
tried that.
So there is like a fatigue inthe people, in the system.
It's a very intense situation.
So I think that's part of it.
There is a lack of trustbetween the sides.
You know Israel and the UN haslike a very long experience, a
bad experience between the sides, and there's a lack of trust.
(15:25):
Putting in addition to that theUNRWA campaign that made all
the UN agencies kind of fall inline of saying we stand behind
UNRWA while to be honest,they're not really that
supportive at UNRWA.
But the fact that UNRWA, kindof you know, fell apart in the
humanitarian structure that theyhad kind of made the rest of
(15:48):
the agencies stepping in.
They weren't prepared for thatand no humanitarian system can
hold too many people for twoyears, 100% of the population,
100% of the time.
So that is a burden on thehumanitarian community and,
let's be honest, countries don'tstand in line to give endless
(16:09):
funds to this humanitariansupport.
So there is a lot of criticismon the UN and want to provide
humanitarian aid or that they'reusing this in order to pressure
Israel.
I don't share that assessmentwith some Israeli officials.
(16:32):
There are issues like thedeconfliction mechanisms that
are challenging throughout thiswar.
We've been hearing about itconstantly.
It is a challenge, thebreakdown of the law and order
inside of Gaza.
That is part of the Israel.
You know it's part of the goalsof the war to dismantle Hamas
governing capabilities.
(16:53):
That equivalents to thebreakdown of law and order.
So Israel could do more,especially on the routes and the
securing of the routes insideof Gaza.
There are some bureaucraticmechanisms that can be lifted in
this, but basically thefundamental part is that there
(17:16):
is no trust between the sides.
So that makes it very hard tocome up with new solutions.
And I'll add to that that thereis no real UN leadership here.
The UN shift changed fivehumanitarian coordinators in two
years.
There is no temporary specialenvoy to the Middle East, so you
(17:36):
don't see a leadership here.
The people on the ground areleft and they are very motivated
but they're exhausted, but theydon't have the backup of their
leaders.
You don't see high level UNofficials arriving to the area.
They're staying in New York,they're giving statements,
they're having like verysupportive tweets, but they're
(17:57):
not here, they're not on theground, they're not addressing.
There are things that thepeople that are stationed in
Israel, you know, decisions thatthey can make and they need
their higher level support andthat discussion, that very high
level strategic discussion,doesn't take place.
Unfortunately, and I thinkthat's part of the problem and
(18:21):
maybe the answer is also there.
Shanie (18:23):
Thank you for that.
I just want to first of allencourage everyone to keep
sending questions in the chatand I'll try to incorporate them
.
I'll just quickly address one,which is the question of why
Israel is responsible for aid.
I want to clarify that thisisn't aid being bought and sent
in by Israel.
It's being facilitated byIsrael, which is the power on
the ground.
This aid is sent from othercountries typically.
So, moving on from that, theGaza Humanitarian Foundation was
(18:46):
created to kind of bypass thisbig issue between Hamas and the
UN and Israel.
I don't know if it was verysuccessful in doing that and I
would love to hear more fromboth of you on its success and
its failures and help usunderstand the many really
terrible instances of Gazansbeing killed at the aid
distribution sites that many ofus have been seeing in the media
over the past few months.
Shira (19:16):
I'll try to be diplomatic about it and I'll let Orr take
the heat for GHF.
I just want to go back tosomething that Orr said, that it
is what you would call acollective failure, the
Ghazi-Munitarian crisis.
It's a collective failure andthis blame game and it's so
frustrating to me.
The 22 months in, we'rebasically in the same
conversation Israel blames theUN, the UN blames Israel.
(19:40):
There's donor fatigue, whichexisted back then.
There are all these issues thatare just becoming worse and
unfortunately, we've crossedthis tipping point, and you know
, the problem with tippingpoints is that once you pass it,
then there's almost no way back.
But we've been in the sameconversation.
Gaza is a man-made crisis.
Right, there are lots.
(20:01):
There could be many technicalsolutions.
That starts with the politicalwill of everyone and it's the
functional relationship with theUN, which you don't have, which
come from the Secretary General.
That, by the the way, there areissues with the Secretary
General in the UN that havenothing to do with Israel.
There are complaints about himand now there are issues there
the Israeli.
What I would think is a veryimmature approach that anyone
(20:24):
that says something bad aboutIsrael is not welcome in the
room for a conversation.
It's very hard to find someonewho doesn't say something bad
about Israel at the moment, withlack of NGOs and structures,
but this all is a governanceissue.
It's the fact of law and orderand breaking down the systems.
What happened in Gaza is not,you know, an earthquake or an
(20:46):
emergency.
You went in and you broke downthe government, and this
government was, whether we likeit or not, it was a Hamas de
facto government system thatIsrael helped create this
monster right and policies withits creation initially we're
talking about decades agohelping guiding everyone that
(21:09):
Hamas is the least badalternative and that it should
remain in governance right,deterred and weakened, whatever
those things are.
And so and he went in and UNRWAwas not just a humanitarian
organization, it wasintergovernmental in the system
and when you break it, you haveno system.
So you know, we can talk abouttrucks and meals and I'll
(21:31):
connect this to Jeff in a secondbut the idea that humanitarian
you know there are practices andI'm not claiming to be a
humanitarian, you know or I cantalk about the technical stuff,
but there's a reason why thehumanitarian community invests
in actual systems to stave offhunger.
You can't count trucks andmeals and calories for 22 months
(21:53):
, and also humanitarian and thisis, you know, it's so much more
than just hunger.
I know the pictures of thosegone people.
It's really, I mean,heartbreaking to see and that's
why all the focus is.
But you know, there's 90% ofthe population, or close to 90%,
is displaced and washed andsanitation and disease.
And like I mean there's 90% ofthe population or close to 90%
is displaced and washed andsanitation and disease, and like
(22:13):
I mean there's a wholebreakdown of anything and not to
mention dignity, god'sHumanitarian Foundation.
I'll just get into this.
There were a lot of reports inUS Press Washington Post, new
York Times I encourage others ifyou want to read sort of the
gossip behind it and the peoplethat are involved.
I'm not going to talk anythingabout the proper governance of
(22:35):
this structure, but the idea was, with Israel saying something
is not working here.
The UN is too principled.
They're holier than the Pope.
They cannot stand the thoughtof delivering aid under IDF
security.
They don't have their ownsecurity.
They are used to work withHamas.
We don't allow that.
(22:55):
So there was really a conundrumand this idea of saying like
maybe we can work with privatecompanies.
You know, I think they haven'tread the memo of like the
privatization of aid didn't workso well in Iraq and other
places.
There are a lot of people thatdid this stuff in Iraq that are
involved.
You know, and this idea of somepeople were looking at this sort
of like disruption, let'sdisrupt the system and with
(23:19):
something that is going againsthumanitarian principles, which
is part of the problem.
Humanitarian principles say youbring the aid to the people.
What happened with GHF?
And there's GHF and SRS and inthe interest of time we can't go
into all these details.
But the idea is like we createdistribution centers and people
are going to walk to us andthey're going to walk to us and
(23:39):
they're going to take the boxesof food which we might cut a
better deal on, which they don't, because the UN gets better
prices.
And in this box of food thereare going to be some things that
we're going to tell a storythat it feeds 75 people every
crate and they're going to walkback with those things and cook
whatever the flour andeverything wherever in their
(24:01):
tent.
And this, this doesn't work.
You know, ghf can be a verypartial solution to assisting
people obtain dry food.
For this you need communitykitchens or home kitchens, which
do not exist.
You need so many other things.
You need perishables, you needvegetables, you need vitamins,
(24:21):
you need all these things.
So you don't have.
But the main thing is, whenyou're asking about, it's like I
don't want to talk about whoshot and there's clearly way too
many arms around GHF.
But what happens is that, as wepredicted before and Orna you
know, there are a lot of peoplethat thought there's going to be
.
When people walk to a placethat is far, and they walk for a
(24:43):
long time in extreme heat andthey're very weak, and they get
there and it's open or not openand there's limited aid being
delivered, of course there'sgoing to be a stampede.
Of course they're going to jumpon the aid.
Of course it's like HungerGames right, the strongest, the
fittest and the bravest jump.
There are warning shots.
Warning shots are actuallyreally dangerous because you
know things happen.
(25:04):
A lot of them are warning shots.
By the way, in Iraq I know themilitary was forbidden from
using warning shots because itcould lead to casualties.
Hamas doesn't like it and soyou'll have people jumping on
the aid.
It's not even like properdistribution.
There's no registration.
We know the same people, orit's thought that the same
(25:26):
people might come every day,collect aid and resell it in the
market.
It's not equitable and so it'sa complete failure.
Now, I'm not saying that inaddition to other things, it
cannot be a supplemental thing,but this idea that Israel and
I'll refer to this some Israelisthought this would be the best
invention since sliced bread.
Shanie (25:58):
And it proves that it doesn't work.
Shira (25:59):
In addition to all these, deaths around it that can be
attributed to various elements.
Or (26:02):
I'm sure Orr has more things to say about GHF.
Talk about GHF for the regionof their existence.
But I will say that when ahuman-charm response is planned,
the focus point is the mostvulnerable population, so it's
the pregnant women, the nursingwomen, the children under the
age of five, the elderly, thedisabled.
(26:24):
This concept, in no shape orform, will address their needs.
So there is no way that apregnant woman can walk five
miles.
Let's say that she'll actuallymanage to get this box that
weighs 22 kilos, and once sheleaves, someone will take it
(26:52):
from her.
And these are things we keep onhearing from people in Gaza.
So if someone actually managedto get to a distribution site,
which they usually open oroperate for an hour max, because
people just rush in, grabwhatever they can and run back
out, there's nothing left forthose most vulnerable.
(27:13):
And that's the key element thatthe UN are saying against this
concept that you're sendingpeople to an active fighting
zone in an area controlled by,I'll say, the counter army,
fighting, and people aresupposed to take the food.
It's dry food.
(27:33):
They're going back, they'rebeing looted on the way, so they
can only take whatever they canJust imagine carrying.
You know.
I remember in the beginning,one of the images, pictures they
published was a handicappedperson standing with a box and I
(27:54):
tried to think, okay, how is hegoing to carry that?
I mean, he can barely stand.
He has a box, and then what?
So, even if the concept, likeShira said that there was a need
to kind of shake thehumanitarian system because it
didn't really work Even beforethe ceasefire those of you who
(28:14):
remember there was alwayscomplaints and it wasn't very
functioning.
So the idea was that we needsomething different.
I think we actually neededsomething different.
I think that wasn't what weneeded.
It was planned badly, it wasimplemented even worse, and the
fact that now it became this youknow, it's like the part of the
(28:38):
blame game of GHF sayingthey're part of the blame game
against the UN, but I don't seea difference.
There is no difference betweenpeople jumping on a truck,
looting the truck, and thenpeople jumping on the food boxes
and looting them, becausethere's no registration here and
here.
So no one really knows how manypeople are being fed in Gaza.
(29:00):
Not the UN, not GHF.
So the fact that GHF publishednumbers of meals, that's great,
but no one knows how manybeneficiaries they have because
they have no registration.
The same for the UN.
So when you're asking how manypeople are hungry in Gaza, no
one knows, because no one knowshow many people are being fed,
how many people are being servedwith humanitarian support.
(29:25):
I will put aside the UAE thatare basically the only one
managing some sort offunctioning humanitarian
response in Gaza.
They don't get any of thecredit.
Talking about credits, buttheir humanitarian response in
Gaza, I think Shira, I thinkyou'll agree, but it's the most
functioning humanitarianresponse at the moment.
(29:47):
They're doing it very quietlybut they're managing.
But again, they will never beable to do too many people and
they don't intend to.
So that's also part of it, butit is part of the playing game.
This concept never worked.
I don't see a reason why itwould work in the most
(30:08):
complicated humanitarianoperation in the world.
No one has conducted ahumanitarian operation in such
intense fighting area.
Never happened.
I don't see why it will succeedhere.
Thank you for that Before I getto the next question.
Shanie (30:24):
We do have a lot of folks who reminded me and I
don't want to take for granted,perhaps I get to the next
question.
We do have a lot of folks whoreminded me and I don't want to
take for granted perhaps I didthat, of course, this entire war
did begin on October 7th withthe horrific massacre by Hamas
and taking of hostages who doremain in captivity to this day,
and they are part ofexperiencing whatever starvation
is happening in Gaza.
Is, we would assume you know,even more so amongst them.
(30:47):
Is, we would assume you know,even more so amongst them, and
Shami, I think again.
Shira (30:54):
I can't believe, 22 months after, we still need to
say that Hamas is a barbaricterrorist organization.
What they did on October 7th,what they did before, the fact
that Gaza was what it was andthe fact that the conditions in
Gaza were pretty awful, alsobefore October 7th, for the
people there are a result of thefact there was a terrorist
(31:16):
organization controlling andsacrificing.
You know they're hurtingIsraelis, but they're also
holding their own people, youknow, victim to their cruelty
and criminality.
So that goes without saying.
And of course, we understandthat if the population in Gaza
suffers from hunger, ourhostages are in an extremely,
(31:39):
extremely, extremely, far worsecondition.
So I mean there's no, I'm sorry, just I think from the
conversation here in Israel thatof course I don't feel like we
have to remind us, but this isdefinitely acknowledged.
It does not mean that we cannottalk about all the other things
that came after October 7th.
Shanie (31:57):
Absolutely, and for those of you who follow Israel
Policy Forum, you know that wespend a lot of time speaking
about every aspect of this war,most notably how it's impacting
those on the grounds in Israeland, of course, the many
soldiers dying, and this is anemergency webinar for a very
specific issue that's coming upa lot for many of us this week.
A lot of folks are alsomentioning and Shira I'll take
this to you directly because youmight have more flexibility A
(32:20):
lot of people want to know veryspecifically about the New York
Times op-ed.
They want to know is it truethat there is no evidence that
Hamas is looting from UN trucks?
That very specific question.
I know you both addressed thesense of lawlessness that has
led to looting, which makes alot of sense, but there's a very
specific claim about Hamas hereand looting of UN trucks
specifically, and I would loveto get your response to that.
Shira (32:41):
So I mean, I don't know if Orr can comment on it, I
don't know.
I have a lot of respect for theNew York Times that there were
(33:03):
two IDF senior officersanonymously.
So I'm pretty sure a journalistactually spoke to IDF officers.
I don the officers whatever,how many they interviewed.
But do you have evidence forHamas stealing aid?
And officers say no, well, wedon't have evidence.
And this is the headline, what Ican say, at least I know I've
(33:25):
heard, okay, I'm not going to gointo the details heard okay,
not from.
I'm not going to go into thedetails.
First of all, there aredifferent types of looting right
in Gaza, by Hamas and by justcriminal gangs, and there's
what's referred to this publiclooting in terms of like, how
everyone divides.
There is intelligence thatsuggests that Hamas benefits
from aid in not just like eatingright.
(33:46):
It's not the fact that Hamasmilitants eat food, it's more
than the fact that they can useit to earn money through a
complex network, exchanges indifferent countries and other
things.
My understanding is that the UN, because it controls the whole,
what you would call, I guess inEnglish you'd say right, oh,
value chain, the whole valuechain from like donor, from
(34:09):
where they source their stuff toto the area, exactly to the
point of distribution.
The UN has their owndistribution sites in the
community.
It's less vulnerable to Hamasexploitation it does not mean
Hamas doesn't benefit from itbut it's less vulnerable than
some NGO that is connected to anIslamic I don't know what, an
(34:33):
exchange in Istanbul and cryptohere, and it gets to somewhere.
And I think this also goes tosomething that we have to talk
about Israel in terms of itsinternational.
I'm not a legal expert, but Ithink Israel still argues that
during because we're still in awar situation, israel is not
responsible for the populationitself.
Israel's responsibility is,under international humanitarian
(34:55):
law, is to facilitate, toenable the aid.
So for a long long time Israelsaid our responsibility is make
sure those trucks come to thecrossing.
The moment they enter thecrossing right on the other side
, it's the UN's problem, by theway they do it.
They say it again today andthey were like no one cared.
It's sort of like what happensfrom the Gaza side of the
cross-sink to how it gets to thebeneficiary.
(35:18):
So there's sort of like, on theone hand, the legal commitment.
The other hand is what isactually happening and how do we
monitor and how much we controlit.
I don't know happening and howdo we monitor and how much we
control it.
I don't know.
Maybe I'll work and elaborateon the data, but I do think the
UN's route is not foolproof butit's less vulnerable.
That's my understanding.
(35:38):
I don't know or what do youthink.
I don't know if you can commenton it.
Or (35:43):
I won't comment on that, but I will add that we need to keep
in mind that there is adistinction between UNRWA and
Hamas involvement in UNRWA'ssystem and the rest of the UN
agencies.
We don't see UNRWA.
Despite their very activesocial media activities, they
(36:07):
are not that involved in thehumanitarian response on the
ground in Gaza.
So even if we did see more ofHamas involvement in UNRWA's aid
distribution partially, notnecessarily benefiting
economically, but did use it asa governing force economically,
(36:34):
but did use it as a governingforce and, like Shira said, the
UN, the rest of the agency'ssystem is less, it's more
controlled in that manner.
But that's all I'll say.
Shanie (36:45):
Thank you.
There are a lot of commentsmore than questions in here, but
important ones, noting for methe lack of clarity, that there
is such confusion, and, I think,the fact that neither of you
has a really concise answer,which is important because it
adds so much more nuance anddepth to the answers.
It's necessary because therearen't really short answers or
soundbites to any of thesequestions, which is, I think,
(37:06):
important to say that there's alot of complexity here amidst
all of the tragedy.
I want to move towards thequestion of pressure on Hamas in
the context of hostagenegotiations.
The escalation of thehumanitarian crisis in Gaza sort
of coincided with this apparentbreakdown in the more recent
hostage negotiations.
How are they related?
Because on the one hand, youcan imagine there is some kind
of strategy of trying to startHamas, or rather limit aid as a
(37:31):
way of pressuring Hamas, but onthe other hand, it doesn't seem
that Hamas is really impacted atall by what happens or the
level of suffering to Gazans onthe ground.
So there's a question of towhat extent this strategy is
meaningful.
Can you kind of connect thosetwo issues for us?
Or (37:48):
I think one of the questions today is who is Hamas?
So in the beginning of the warthere was a clear structure of
Hamas.
There was a leadership in Gaza,there was a leadership abroad.
There was a very clearconnection between the two.
This very intense fightingrightly so, and kind of
(38:10):
dismantled the majority of the Imean the majority of the
leaders in Gaza are killed.
So when you talk about Hamas,the interests are so spread out
that the leaders in at themoment in Doha, even though they
just left, doesn't necessarily,you know, share the same
(38:30):
interest as the people in Gaza.
And even in Gaza, who is thereto left, to make the decision?
There's always.
I mean, I think the only leftsenior official is a Zadin who's
, you know, comes from a veryextreme military wing.
So when you say Hamas, then whodo you refer to?
I don't think that thehumanitarian pressure on the
(38:53):
population is a big concern tothem.
Yes, they would want to see itas part of end the war and a
ceasefire, that they will beable to go back to the community
and say, here, this is what webrought.
I don't think that's the numberone topic go back to the
community and say, here, this iswhat we brought.
I don't think that's the numberone topic, which what Israel
(39:15):
kind of hoped that thehumanitarian pressure will kind
of force Hamas to get a betterceasefire.
I do think that what we sawkind of backfired because there
was more pressure on Israel toend the war.
That kind of made Hamas say,okay, we can keep on going, so
we can come from a strongerposition to this, because Israel
is under so much pressureinternationally that they will
(39:39):
need to be the weaker part ofthe discussion, while Israel
kind of hoping that thehumanitarian pressure will
change the equation.
It didn't.
So I think that's also part ofit that we fail to see or fail
to understand whether or notHamas really cares about the
(40:01):
humanitarian response in Gazaand we I think it's very clear
that they don't.
Shira (40:08):
Yeah, I'll just want to add to this that of course Hamas
, they don't care about this.
They never like the civilianpart of the job anyway, even
with the de facto governance andso this.
But I think and it really goesto who is in Hamas today and the
decision-making processes butthere's a bigger issue, right?
But there's a bigger issue,right, israel's war aims have
(40:31):
been pretty much justsloganeering, right?
A complete defeat of Hamas.
You know this complete defeat.
I mean there are war goals thatare dismantling Hamas as a
governing authority, as militaryauthority, and bringing back
the hostages, the first two.
You could argue that Israelachieved is no longer an army.
Right, it's a guerrillaorganization, but it's not an
(40:55):
army, it's not a governingauthority.
At the moment, the hostagesmost are back, but we still have
50 hostages alive and dead inGaza.
But arguably, israel could tella winning story, just like it
did in Lebanon and in Gaza.
But arguably, israel could tella winning story like, just like
he did in Lebanon and in Iran,where the military achievement
is imperfect.
But because Israel is stickingto this idea of like, we will
(41:18):
not talk about the day after,until after, and there has been
no plan, no way tooperationalize even what Israel
is saying.
Right, it's like one Hamas gone, we want an exile.
Okay, can you name 10 people inHamas that you want to exile?
Do you want to give them thishonor of exiling them?
Do we have 10?
(41:38):
I mean, I'm serious, these arereal questions.
Do you want disarmament of whom?
From whom?
Who is the day after?
Not PA, but yes, fatah clans.
Not PA, but yes, fatah clans.
Nod, nod, yes, no.
I mean and this leaves us with abigger issue that there is sort
of a theoretical threat onHamas that Israel is going to
occupy Gaza.
(41:58):
Right, there's a hole now.
If Hamas doesn't decide, ifHamas doesn't go back to the
negotiations now and doesn'tbecome more flexible in the
negotiation, israel is going togo and annex territory and
occupy Gaza.
But I got to tell you thatHamas has been pretty good about
reading the Israeli public andthere's no appetite for this.
(42:20):
So I'm not saying they'recalling the Israeli bluff
because maybe this will beimplemented, but it's really not
what Israelis want.
I mean, there's a minority inIsrael wants that, but it's a
very short minority.
I mean, I'm not going to speakabout the IDF, but it's not the
IDF's preferred choice course ofaction.
This is not what they want.
There are immense costs to thiseconomic, in human lives and
(42:46):
diplomatic that Israel cannotassume the burden of.
I think of full occupation andmilitary rule, and Israeli
society doesn't want that.
So I think, from Hamas'perspective, if Israel's threat
is not credible in their eyes,israel is undergoing this
diplomatic tsunami, beingtreated like I don't know, you
(43:06):
know ways that I've never seenthis and haven't anticipated.
So Hamas really benefits fromthis right and the fact that
Hamas is like what is our bestchoice?
Anyway?
Who are we?
It's not like we're seeking arefuge out.
So in that regard, it's notsurprising that they're
toughening their position and Ithink we Israelis we're in a
(43:30):
bind.
We have to find there needs tobe a way out of this and not
this other way, because then notjust the humanitarian crisis,
but so many other things aregoing to fall onto Israel's laps
.
Shanie (43:45):
I'm going to ask this.
This is the first question I'masking verbatim, because I think
it was very succinct who isactually in charge of picking up
the aid from the truck sittingjust inside the border?
Or (44:00):
In an ideal situation if things were functioning smoothly
what would happen with allthose trucks and all of that aid
?
So each truck that is sent intoGaza, there is someone that
bought it or paid for it or gotit.
So whoever sent the truck, it'slike a two-way coordination.
So you coordinate the trucks tothe crossing from the Israeli
side and the same guy that sentit, or the same organization,
(44:26):
same figure, same entity is theone responsible for picking it
up.
So when the UN is sending 30trucks, they are supposed to
collect the 30 trucks.
Part of the aid that all of ussaw on the ground on the
Palestinian side of Kerem Shalomin the recent briefings.
Part of it is the UN.
It's very clear.
You can see the logo on it andsome of them are not.
(44:47):
Some of them are from otherinternational organizations
operating in Gaza.
So the process is that if yousend a truck from Israel to the
processing, you're sending atruck to come from Gaza to pick
it up.
It's like back to back.
That's it.
It's very simple.
(45:08):
So there's no one responsible.
Each organization isresponsible for them.
By the way, it's part of theirresponsibility for their donors.
So if someone donated eitherfunds or kinds to an
organization, it's theirresponsibility towards their
donors to than it sounds.
It's more complicated in termsof security and the confliction
(45:34):
on the way, but the process iseasier than it sounds.
Shanie (45:41):
Thinking more about the political side of this.
There are a lot of questionshere regarding to what extent
decisions around aid arepolitically motivated on the
Israeli side, and I'm wonderingif you can speak to that a
little bit, shira, obviouslythere are a lot of factors at
play.
I would imagine politics is oneof them amongst many,
militarily and otherwise.
Can you address that?
Shira (46:04):
I mean, I think first and foremost, it's an ideological.
It's an ideological politicalquestion you have to understand.
After October 7, israelis haveno empathy to what's happening
in Gaza and especially when thehostages you know when there's
still hostages there and the waythey were treated according to
(46:26):
reports.
So there's this issue with themedia self-censoring here, right
, and we hear all the time thatthe editors say that our viewers
don't want to watch it.
So what's even in Gaza?
And the fact that, just likeIsraelis I mean of course you
can go on social media and takethe effort, but you know
Israelis are in their echochambers and don't see this.
There is a whole discussion andthere's really a tension
(46:49):
between the fact that it'spolitically, it's a very
unpopular issue inside Israeland it goes in a reverse
correlation to what the worldthinks, the diplomatic community
.
I can tell you that I went backjust past week looking at
decisions that had to do withhumanitarian assistance when
(47:09):
after October 7th.
So you know the beginning, whenI think it was late November,
late October when aid startedgoing in through Rafah, but when
aid started going throughIsrael which I think was around
or probably remembers thehistory, but around December
2023, or after the firstceasefire hostage agreement and
(47:31):
there were movements like theTzavtasha, the Snine Warrant
movement of Israeli civiliansthat were blocking aid convoys
going to Gaza using violencearound Jerusalem.
I mean it was that contentious.
The idea was like why would weprovide aid to Gaza after what
(47:53):
they did to us and as long as westill have hostages there?
It's also there's the fact thatIsraelis don't know that it's
not really Israeli aid.
I mean, we can talk about howmuch Israel is now paying for
some of these things and thereseems to be that Israel is
paying for some of it, but backthen the was not the question.
It was just about enabling andnot understanding Israel's
(48:15):
commitments.
And you know, we say now aboutSmotrich and Ben-Vir, obviously
the most hawkish members ofNetanyahu's government, but it's
not just them.
I mean, you hear across theboard in Israel, at the
beginning it was Yoav Galand,and then it was even a a former
commander, general Rassan Alian,from Koga, saying that there's
not going to be a water in Gazaand nothing's going to, no food
(48:38):
is going to go, and the factthat a lot of people say, wait,
are we enabling now humanitariancrisis without getting anything
in return?
Right, because thishumanitarian component, and a
surge in humanitarian aidusually comes, or had come
previously, in connection withceasefire agreements.
So why are we giving this?
So this is so political and theconsiderations are so political
(48:59):
and the fact that Netanyahuhimself, who did like so many
180s on this, right in responseto.
I can give you an example therewas a tweet by Naftali Bennett
of some armed guy on a truck afew weeks ago and then Israel
decided to shut down the littleaid that went in to the north of
Gaza back then.
But now again, the fact thatNetanyahu makes this dramatic
(49:21):
decision on a Saturday Shabbat,only to keep away coalition
members who are not going toattend, only to keep away
coalition members who are notgoing to attend, because this
just tells you how contentiousit is.
So extremely, extremely,extremely political, which is
really complicated, which isreally a problem, because it's a
serious issue and the politicshave to be just one
(49:45):
consideration.
It can't be all of it.
Shanie (49:49):
Howard, do you have anything to add on that?
Or (49:52):
I'll just add that for like a year and a half, israel said
that the humanitarian policy, orwhatever humanitarian
assistance goes into Gaza, isbecause of the US administration
, pressure and demands.
So part of it is now a lot ofpeople in Israel, both from the
(50:15):
public and also in politics, aresaying OK, it's a different
administration.
Israel has the support of thiscurrent administration to do,
you know, whatever you want inGaza.
So why are we resuming the aidafter the ceasefire broke?
So it was like in thetransition period that the
ceasefire occurred when theinstitution changed and
(50:38):
therefore after the ceasefirethere was no humanitarian aid.
So there was an anticipation inIsrael to say, okay, this is
the golden card, this is what wecan play with, and why are we
using the humanitarian card fornothing?
So that's also something, and Iheard Smoltysh today saying
(51:04):
that there is a reason, there'sa bigger reason for him to
accept what is happening nowwith the humanitarian, because
something big is happening.
So everyone's trying to framewhy the shift in the
humanitarian policy happened onSaturday policy happen on
(51:28):
Saturday.
Shanie (51:29):
I think this is probably going to be our last question.
I'll ask Orr to take it first,which is in an ideal scenario.
What do we do going forward?
What does the distribution looklike?
How do we alleviate the crisis?
You can speak about any actorsinvolved the UN, ghf, israel.
I mean, there's a lot Hamas cando, so maybe you can leave them
out or include.
And then, shira, I'll ask youto answer this afterwards and
then tie it to a broader visionfor Gaza and the
(51:51):
Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Or (51:54):
I really think that this requires a joint coordination
and a different approach by allparties.
So keep on doing what we'vebeen doing for the last 22
months.
It isn't going anywhere.
We're still using the samecards, we're still playing the
(52:16):
same methods and mechanisms thatwe tried and it failed.
I think that the UN needs toimplement the full scope of the
humanitarian clusters, with realprofessional leaders that have
the power to make decisions.
Diverting aid not necessarilythe UN aid, but aid in general
(52:36):
there's a UN security resolutionon this and the fact that the
UN keeps on fighting Israel andwhether or not Hamas is
diverting aid isn't helping, andI think Israeli insistence of
(53:01):
using the same route isn'tworking.
The deconfliction mechanismfailed completely.
There is no trust.
I think we need a grown-up, aresponsible grown-up in the room
, and there is no one at themoment to get the sides together
and say okay, you need to sitdown and this all needs to work.
(53:23):
I think that the Americans arethe only one that can impose
such a thing on Israel and, tobe honest, at the moment,
there's no one in the USadministration that deals with
humanitarian especially now thatit's no longer USAID but
there's no one that actuallydeals with humanitarian and
therefore I'm taking intoaccount that this GHF thing is
(53:44):
like a given, mainly forpolitical reasons in Israel, but
I think there is a way, becausethe logistics of Gaza failed.
I think that this is a strongside, or and we'll have new
(54:06):
people and people that canactually make a decision and not
necessarily, like Shira said,the decisions always come like
at the last moment, likeSaturday morning we're saying
we're going to, you know, changethe humanitarian concept.
Saturday evening it'simplemented.
There is even not enough timefor the soldier in the end to
get the orders, but you alreadysee the trucks moving.
(54:29):
So I think we need to, likepause for a minute, you know,
sit, come up with a plan.
I think that there is.
Like I said, I think the UAEcan play a significant role in
this, definitely the Egyptians,definitely the Jordanians.
I think the Abraham Accords canplay a significant role in this
(54:49):
.
I think we're missing,partially because we're so
obsessed with the blame game onwho's to fault and, in the end,
the people of Gaza are suffering.
Shira (55:02):
Yeah, I'll just add to what Orr says.
We can talk about specifictechnical issues, right, some
customs pressures and openingmore routes and this, and
vouchers, cash for works andother systems, but it's just not
disconnected from the bigproblem of what Israel is
(55:23):
planning to do with Gaza,because the Arabs and you hear
it also in the Emiratis they'renumber one, despite what
President Trump said, that noother country puts more money
into Gaza.
It's very not.
It's factually not true.
The Emiratis have put a lot ofmoney into this way, more than
the United States, by the way,also the Europeans, by the way,
(55:49):
also the Europeans but they'rereluctant to do more without
articulating a vision for theday after in Gaza.
That has to do with thePalestinian governance that is
supported, and then the Arabswill come in.
They have said it.
They have certain conditions,they want an invite and they
want some sort of affiliation toa formal political Palestinian
body, which I know of only one.
But this is where it is anduntil Israel, or if Israel
(56:14):
doesn't want that, it needs tooffer something else.
And because Israel and this issort of the bigger picture I
think there are Israelis hereacross the board who are
clinging on to what they say isPresident Trump's vision for the
voluntary migration of thePalestinians from Gaza.
And they're saying you knowthis would be the.
(56:35):
Eventually they will move rightand then you can do other
things.
And I just saw that PresidentTrump said today that some he
said it's a concept, some peoplefell in love with the idea,
some people haven't.
It's fresh from an hour ago.
Maybe some doesn't want toleave, some of them are leaving,
some wants to leave if they hadan alternative.
(56:56):
At the moment they don't haveone.
So I think a clear message fromthe US that this is really this
will look like a quite feasibleplan would also put Israel's you
throw the ball and we have toplan.
The humanitarian is a strategicissue.
There are technical solutions.
They're not easy where we are,don't get me wrong but first and
foremost it'd have to be partof a much bigger strategic
(57:19):
position of where this is going.
Thank you both so much.
I know you came directly fromyour safe rooms to join us on
this call today, and you both somuch I know.
Shanie (57:24):
you came directly from your safe rooms to join us on
this call today, and we are, ofcourse, all hoping for the
return of the hostages, thealleviation of the humanitarian
crisis and an end to the war andall that comes with it for both
Israelis and Palestinians.
The recording of this webinarwill be posted on the briefings
page of the Israel Policy Forumwebsite.
I, of course, also encourageyou to subscribe to the podcast
Israel Policy Pod.
(57:45):
Sign up to receive the weeklyCopplow column in your email
inbox and visit the IsraelPolicy Forum website for more
insight and analysis from ourteam of experts.
That does include reports on arange of topics that were
discussed today.
Once again, a big thank you toIsrael Policy Forum supporters
who are with us on the calltoday.
Again, I invite the rest of youto join the Israel Policy Forum
family of donors by visitingisraelpolicyforumorg support.
(58:08):
You can also find Israel PolicyForum on Instagram.
Please stay tuned for anannouncement regarding the next
Israel Policy Forum videobriefing.
Until then, thank you again fortuning in and we'll see you
soon.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.