Israel has halted all food and supply shipments into Gaza, a move reminiscent of the blockade imposed at the start of its conflict with Hamas. This decision has drawn strong criticism from the United Nations and other aid organizations, who deem it a breach of international law.
Saudi Arabia’s foreign ministry described the action as “a tool of extortion,” while Oxfam called it “a reckless act of collective punishment.” Egypt, a key mediator, accused Israel of employing “starvation as a weapon.”
Food scarcity has been a persistent problem for Gaza’s population of over 2 million throughout the war, with some aid experts previously warning of potential famine. There are now concerns about the reversal of progress made during the recent six-week ceasefire.
Israel’s stated aim is to pressure Hamas to accept what the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu calls a U.S.-backed proposal. This proposal seeks to extend the initial phase of the ceasefire, rather than proceed to negotiations on the more complex second phase, where Hamas would release the remaining living hostages in exchange for Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza and a permanent ceasefire.
Here’s a breakdown of the implications of Israel’s decision and the reactions it has provoked.
U.S. says it supports Israel’s next steps
The initial phase of the ceasefire concluded early Sunday. Shortly after, Israel announced its support for a new proposal to prolong this phase through the Jewish holiday of Passover in mid-April, identifying it as a U.S. initiative led by Mideast envoy Steve Witkoff. Israel also cautioned that it might resume hostilities after the first phase if it believes negotiations are unproductive.
Negotiations regarding the second phase were originally scheduled to begin a month prior, adding to the uncertainty surrounding the fragile truce. Hamas has consistently demanded that these discussions commence.
Later on Sunday, Israel declared the immediate suspension of aid to Gaza.
The U.S. National Security Council stated that Washington would support Israel’s “decision on next steps, given Hamas has indicated it’s no longer interested in a negotiated ceasefire.” The statement did not confirm Witkoff’s involvement in the proposal or mention the aid cutoff.
The timing of Witkoff’s next visit to the Middle East remains unclear, though he was expected to travel there last week.
The U.S. government under President Biden had previously urged Israel to increase aid access to Gaza, even threatening to limit arms support. Aid organizations have repeatedly criticized Israeli restrictions on items entering the territory, leading to situations where hundreds of aid trucks were held up at the border.
Israel maintains that it has permitted sufficient aid to enter Gaza, attributing shortages to the U.N.’s inability to distribute it effectively and accusing Hamas of diverting aid for their own purposes.
In the months leading up to the ceasefire, many Palestinians reported reducing their meals, scavenging through waste, and searching for edible plants due to dwindling food supplies.
600 trucks of aid a day
The first phase of the ceasefire, which began on Jan. 19, facilitated a significant increase in aid reaching Gaza, with an average of 600 trucks entering daily. This level of aid was intended to continue throughout all three phases of the ceasefire.
However, Hamas claims that less than half of the agreed-upon amount of fuel, necessary for generators and other uses, was allowed into Gaza. They also assert that the entry of live animals and animal feed, crucial for food security, was blocked.
Despite these issues, Palestinians in Gaza were able to replenish some of their supplies. “The ceasefire brought some much-needed relief to Gaza, but it was far from enough to cover the immense needs,” the Norwegian Refugee Council stated on Sunday.
Israel’s announcement coincided with Muslims in Gaza observing the first breaking of the fast during Ramadan, with communal meals set up among the ruins of buildings destroyed in the war.
The sudden cutoff of aid prompted Palestinians to rush to markets, causing prices in Gaza to “triple immediately,” according to Mahmoud Shalabi, the Medical Aid for Palestinians’ deputy director of programs in northern Gaza, as reported by The Associated Press.
Legal implications
Immediate criticism of Israel’s decision prominently featured statements asserting that the action constituted a violation of international law.
“International humanitarian law is clear: We must be allowed access to deliver vital lifesaving aid,” stated U.N. humanitarian chief, Tom Fletcher.
Within hours of Israel’s announcement, five non-governmental organizations petitioned Israel’s Supreme Court for an interim order to prevent the state from blocking aid to Gaza. They argued that the move violated Israel’s obligations under international law and amounted to a war crime, stating, “These obligations cannot be condition on political considerations.”
Last year, the International Criminal Court (ICC) stated that there was reason to believe Israel had used “starvation as a method of warfare” when it issued an arrest warrant for Netanyahu. This allegation is also a central element in South Africa’s case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), accusing Israel of genocide.
On Sunday, Kenneth Roth, former head of Human Rights Watch, stated that Israel, as an occupying power, has an “absolute duty” to facilitate humanitarian aid under the Geneva Conventions. He described Israel’s decision as “a resumption of the war-crime starvation strategy” that led to the ICC warrant.
—Associated Press writers Samy Magdy in Cairo and Josef Federman in Jerusalem contributed.
“`