How the declining support for Israel is impacting U.S. politics

Mondoweiss spoke with political consultant Peter Feld about the declining support for Israel across the political spectrum and age groups, and the far-reaching effects it's having on U.S. politics, from local mayoral races all the way up to Trump.

ANALYSIS
By Michael Arria

April 25, 2025 11
MONDOWEISS

The Palestine movement, immigrant rights groups, and community members gathered together in Newark, NJ on March 28, 2025 to protest the detention of Mahmoud Khalil. (Photo: Sam Carliner)


Earlier this month, Pew released a survey showing 53% of Americans now hold an unfavorable view of Israel, up from 42% in 2022.

Declining support for Israel has been a consistent theme of such polling in recent years, particularly among Democratic voters. However, despite the numbers, most elected officials remain firmly committed to Israel.

We’ve seen this disconnect on full display in recent weeks, as Democratic politicians have attempted to counter the Trump administration’s agenda. Despite Trump’s extreme suppression of the Palestine movement, only a small number of Congress members have taken a firm stance on the issue, preferring to omit Gaza, and the goals of protesters, from their critiques.

Mondoweiss U.S. correspondent Michael Arria spoke with political consultant Peter Feld about the recent polling, the opposition to Trump, the New York mayoral race, and whether Israel will end up factoring into the midterms.

There’s a recent Pew poll that shows support for Israel has dropped significantly since 2022. What did you make of those findings and what stood out to you about the data?

I think one of the important things is to put polls in the context of other surveys. When you ask about an issue in different ways, sometimes you get very different results.

However, in multiple polls on Israel, we are seeing the same trend. There’s that Pew poll from April that looks at favorability, and shows that Israel has a 53% negative rating, which is the majority of Americans’ overall unfavorable viewpoint. That’s an 11 point increase since March 2022. In March there was a Gallup poll that showed only a 43% minority of Americans now side with Israel over the Palestinians, and that Democrats side with Palestinians over Israel by 59% to 21%. Then you go back to the CBS/YouGov survey from June of last year, which showed that 61% of Americans wanted to stop sending arms to Israel.

When you look at the Pew crosstabs by party and age, there are some really striking findings that are worth paying attention to.

Over two thirds — 69% — of Democrats now have an unfavorable view toward Israel, and that’s up 16 points, from 53% in March 2022. You also see that the generation gap among Democrats has almost completely disappeared. It used to be mainly younger Democrats with an unfavorable view of Israel, but now there’s only a slight gap. Among Democrats under 50, 71% are unfavorable toward Israel. With Democrats age 50 and over it’s pretty similar: 66% are unfavorable toward Israel.

If you compare March 2022 to now, the younger Democrats have become more unfavorable, going from 62% to 71%—a 9% increase. But among Democrats 50 and over, it went from 43% unfavorable to 66% unfavorable, meaning a 23% jump in unfavorable attitudes toward Israel among older Democrats. That’s a much bigger shift. Older Democrats are now more or less indistinguishable within the margin of error from the younger Democrats. So that generation gap has disappeared.

Then you look at Republicans. Only 37% of Republicans are unfavorable toward Israel. Still, that’s a 10-point jump from 2022, when it was only 27%. But look among younger Republicans—that’s where the jump has occurred. In March 2022, younger Republicans were only 35% unfavorable toward Israel. Now, it’s 50%. Israel has lost the older Democrats, it’s lost the younger Republicans. All it has left now are the older Republicans.


The harsh repression we see now is a direct inverse of these bad polling numbers for Israel.

So the propaganda on Israel since October 7 just hasn’t worked. The media blackout also hasn’t worked, what’s happening in Gaza has really penetrated. The repression also hasn’t worked.

The harsh repression we see now is a direct inverse of these bad polling numbers for Israel. The more people are deported, fired, have their grants canceled, have their events canceled, the more universities crack down on student protesters to impress Donald Trump or Elise Stefanik, the more it’s driving people away from Israel and towards a more sympathetic view towards Palestinians.

We are seeing that Israel can’t repress its way to popularity.

During the first weekend of April, there was a big protest in DC over Gaza. There were also thousands of “HANDS OFF!” rallies across the country, broadly opposing the Trump/Musk agenda. The major organizers of those events were the 50501 movement, the Indivisible movement, and the Women’s March.

These groups identified a long list of progressive issues they were fighting for, but did not include Gaza. At some of the actual protests, the issue was represented and referenced, but there was clearly a certain level of disconnect between the organizers and the actual protesters.

Can you talk about that disconnect? Why aren’t progressive organizations bringing up the issue when the polling shows us people oppose U.S. support for the genocide?

I think the organizers of those events are partially responding to the repression. But it’s not going to work because of these numbers that we’ve been going over. The people who show up to these protest actions are very likely to support Palestine. One of the things that’s driving turnout to these actions is Trump and ICE seizing people off the street for expressing those points of view that the base agrees with.

Pro-Palestine protesters at the Hands Off rally in Beacon NY, April 5, 2025 (Peter Feld)

I think when organizers are repressing the expression of Palestine solidarity at these events, it’s because they have many ties to the institutional Democrats, the ones in Congress, the lawmakers that we’re gonna talk about. They’re trying to accommodate the Zionist sensibilities of establishment Democrats.

They’re also thinking back to 2017, when there was a lot of fracturing among the coalition at the Women’s March over the issue of Israel. But I go back to the polling here. They’re going to have to get out of the way of a fast-moving train.

We had that Pew poll this month. Last month, we had a Gallup poll showing a minority of Americans — still a 46% to 33% plurality — sympathize with Israel over Palestine. But among Democrats, it’s just blown out. 59% side with Palestine and only 21% side with Israel. That’s three-to-one, a huge reversal.


There is no way that the organizers of these events are going to be able to keep the lid on a boiling pot of three-to-one sympathy with Palestine over Israel. They just won’t be able to do it.

We saw it again last year, the CBS/YouGov poll from June 2024, where 61% of Americans said they wanted the U.S. to stop sending Israel weapons. Among Democrats, that was 77%. Among Black Americans, that went up to 75%.


So, it’s young and old. It’s Black people. Over 60% of Latino voters wanted to stop sending Israel weapons. It’s the whole Democratic coalition.

All these polls show the same thing and it’s why the repression is intensifying — and it shows why repression can’t work.

Let’s get to the lawmakers. Senator Chris Van Hollen went to El Salvador last week to visit Kilmar Abrego Garcia and try to get him released. We just saw a delegation of Massachusetts congress members go to Louisiana, where Rümeysa Öztürk and Mahmoud Khalil are being held. Senator Peter Welch visited Mohsen Mahdawi.

There have been some others, but the majority of Democratic lawmakers aren’t opposing Trump’s policies in this kind of direct way. You certainly don’t see politicians like Schumer or Gillibrand going to bat for their many constituents who have been targeted. What have you made of the Democratic response to Trump on these issues, and why aren’t more Democrats doing this?

There’s a complete split among establishment Democratic leaders. If you look at the public opinion, there was another poll that came out from FIRE that shows just one quarter of Americans want people deported for supporting Palestine. Once again, public opinion is with Palestine.


But when you get to people like Schumer and Gillibrand, their constituency is their donors. Their constituents are the pro-Israel establishment, there’s no way that they are going to stick their necks out.

Chris Van Hollen is an interesting case because when he ran for Senate, he was not the one supported by the Palestinian community in his Senate election. Donna Edwards was considered to be the stronger supporter of Palestine, and braver than him on the issue.

So he’s a pleasant surprise in all of this. He’s obviously seen the need for this and he’s going to reap political benefits. Other people are going to try to get behind this now.

For instance, Cory Booker says he wants to go to El Salvador now. Cory Booker was basking in the glow of his 25-hour filibuster in which he praised the IDF and didn’t condemn anything that Israel’s done in Gaza. He was the hero for a few days, and now he’s been eclipsed by Van Hollen, who did something much more transformational than talking at night in an empty Senate chamber.

I think other politicians will do this, but I don’t think you’ll get the Schumers and Gillibrands of the world to join in.

We’ve talked about this before, but until somebody loses an election over supporting Israel too much, I don’t see it changing.

I would direct you toward the upcoming primaries next year. Everybody is expecting next year to be a very active year in Democratic primaries because the base is so angry at the Democrats for doing so little. First, when they had power under Biden, and now in opposing Trump.

There will be a few elections where Israel will be on the ballot and one of them as soon as two months from now, in the Democratic primary for mayor in New York City, where you’re you know you’re going to have a clear split between the top two candidates, Andrew Cuomo and Zohran Mamdani.

Can you talk about that race a little?

I think there will be congressional primaries next year where the issue of Israel comes up, but the New York race is sooner, and it’s more crystallized around Israel than most of them are.

Cuomo has always been a huge, shameless panderer to Israel. During the Israeli attacks on Gaza in 2014, he went to Israel and posed in a tunnel. He issued an executive order saying that anybody who’s part of an Israel boycott can’t do business with the state of New York. He bellowed, in his typical uncharming style, “If you boycott Israel, New York state will boycott you.”

Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani from Queens, who is running for mayor in the June 24 Democratic primary, is well-known in Palestine activist circles. He introduced the Not On Our Dime bill, which would stop New York State from subsidizing illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank.

He’s taken some hits from it, but he’s thriving in the mayor’s race. He has surged above every other challenger except for Cuomo.

He just gave an interview to Politico where he was extremely forthright about everything that he’s done on Palestine, including reaffirming the reasons why he supports BDS.


I think Cuomo’s attempt to Israelize the election is going to backfire. This could actually help give Mamdani the further strength to overtake him. If that happens, I think it’s going to set the table for some of the primaries next year.

So you have an openly pro-BDS candidate, who is running against someone who tried to outlaw BDS.

I think Cuomo and some of the other candidates are expecting that Mamdani’s support for Palestine in the end is going to hold him back and allow other candidates to get past him.

However, you’ll remember that Andrew Yang was the mayoral front runner for many months in 2021, and he lost his front runner status after issuing a very belligerent, pandering tweet in support of Israel. That is really considered the turning point, when all the air started to go out of the balloon of his campaign.

I would also say that the 59% to 21% sympathy for Palestine over Israel seen among Democrats nationwide in that Gallup Poll is probably not too far from the reality in New York, even though people think New York has different dynamics because there are so many engaged constituencies for Israel and for Palestine.

I think Cuomo’s attempt to Israelize the election is going to backfire. This could actually help give Mamdani the further strength to overtake him. If that happens, I think it’s going to set the table for some of the primaries next year.

Let’s talk about AIPAC. They just launched attack ads against the senators who backed Bernie’s resolutions aiming to block a weapon sale to Israel. They obviously had some big victories last time around, with the ousting of Bush and Bowman, but what’s the current state of AIPAC and the wider pro-Israel movement?

AIPAC traditionally has not used Israel as an issue when they’ve done all those independent expenditure campaigns, like the ones against Bowman and Bush.

I think there are a lot of people that are afraid that AIPAC is going to come into their district with tens of millions of dollars to spend against them, but they might be less worried that being attacked over Israel is actually going to hurt them, especially depending on what constituency they’re running in and if they’re running in a Democratic primary or if they’re running in purple state general election.

Going back to New York, there’s a local AIPAC-type group called Solidarity PAC. They do tend to attack Palestine supporters over Israel, and I’m not sure it always works. We’re going to soon see how effective it is up against 3-to-1 support for Palestine among Democrats.


I don’t think AIPAC is going to be able to hold back this tide of Democrats who side with Palestine.

People who support Palestine are going to have to find a way to take that margin to the bank and cash it in by electing people who support Palestine and defeating people who’ve been on the forefront of supporting Israel.

Schumer and Gillibrand are very lucky because neither of them has an election in the next cycle. Gillibrand was just reelected with no Democratic opponent and, in retrospect, it was probably a mistake for AOC to pass up the chance of challenging her because Gillibrand is a very unimpressive Senator. She’s on the forefront of supporting crypto and she’s been steadfast in supporting Israel. She’s a part of the Abraham Accords Caucus.

Schumer’s election is up sooner, he’s up in 2028. It’s widely expected that AOC is in a strong position to challenge him, according to polling. We will see when and if that ever starts affecting his actions.

I don’t think AIPAC is going to be able to hold back this tide of Democrats who side with Palestine.

What should we make of this recent announcement from Democratic National Committee vice chair David Hogg, that he’s going to fund primary challengers against some Democratic incumbents? Do you think Israel is going to factor into any of this?

I haven’t seen Hogg bring up Palestine yet. I think that he has some of the same limitations that the “Hands Off!” organizers do. They’re trying to thread the needle and stay acceptable to the Democratic establishment and not fracture their coalitions. But they’re not going to be able to hold back support for Palestine, either because you’re going to get individual candidates who are going to step up on this issue and they won’t necessarily be all driven by David Hogg, as much as I respect his move to primary Democrats.

Most of his argument comes from this idea that lawmakers aren’t standing up to Trump sufficiently. That’s true and understandably has a lot of resonance, but that critique can’t ignore the fact that Trump is deporting people over Palestine with only 25% support from the population.

Let’s see what someone like Maxwell Frost does. Mondoweiss did a very in-depth piece about Maxwell Frost’s election win. He was this Gen-Z darling for left-leaning Dems and he completely abandoned Palestine in his first race for Congress. Just completely distanced himself from the activists that he’d been working with. He’s come back around, and some of his votes have been good, but there’s still this attempt to thread the needle.

I think it’s going to take very brave challengers who aren’t necessarily answering to people like David Hogg but are actually out there talking about the issue. That’s why I just keep coming back to Zohran Mamdani. He’s not going to moderate his views on things like BDS. He’s not backtracking. And we already see how the threat of a challenge from Kat Abughazaleh, a Palestinian insurgent candidate, helped pressure Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky into dropping her reelection campaign.

Next year we will likely see more challengers really standing up for Palestine. If one or two of them wins, it’s going to have a really dramatic impact on the Schumers and Gillibrands of the world.

We have seen all these draconian moves from Trump, these attempts to really cripple the domestic Palestine movement. I am wondering if you had any thoughts on why this is such a focus for the administration? What is so threatening to the U.S government about more and more people criticizing Israel?

Israel has always been a difficult proposition because it was a settler colonial outpost in the Middle East. People like Hakeem Jeffries always say things like, “Well, Israel is in a bad neighborhood.” (“Who chose the bad neighborhood?” Philip Weiss once asked.)

I would say the U.S. imperial project requires Israel, so the establishment will not back off from Israel, regardless of public opinion, unless it’s forced to, and it’s going to take a lot more force than we’ve seen so far.

Groups like AIPAC or lawmakers like Trump can’t maintain support for the Israeli project without all this repression. They understand that, unless people are scared to speak out on Palestine, they will naturally speak out on Palestine.

They’ve gone after the most vulnerable. They’ve targeted students, green card holders, other immigrants, and even tourists in some cases. They’re talking about sending citizens to a foreign prison.

I don’t think Trump cares about public opinion. Just look at what he’s done to the markets with the tariffs, he doesn’t care. He certainly doesn’t care what people think about Israel and Palestine. He doesn’t care about public opinion when it comes to the deportations. I think he feels like he’s got control of the government and he will not give it up through the usual means. I don’t even think he cares about the midterms.

It goes beyond Trump. There’s a presumption throughout the press, the more mainstream and conservative press, that the public sides with Israel — when all these numbers show it doesn’t.

There’s also the key issue of Christian Zionism, which Marco Rubio is part of. Trump isn’t really a part of it, but he’s happy to exploit it, and a lot of the MAGA movement is in the grip of evangelical Christian Zionists.

These people are completely comfortable making common cause with white supremacists, Christian nationalists, even Nazi sympathizers, to attack Palestine. It even fits into their wider project of destroying academia. They’re talking about toppling universities. They’re talking about defunding Columbia, defunding Harvard, and using antisemitism as their weapon.

The other reason why they focus so much on repressing pro-Palestine protest is because they’ve had success with these tactics going back to the congressional hearings last summer, when multiple university presidents knuckled under and completely acquiesced to the Republican MAGA definition of antisemitism, which is also the IHRA working definition of antisemitism.

When they watch these universities knuckle under, call the police on their own students, revoke degrees, and expel students, they see that it works. They keep doing it because it’s now a proven technique for them.

It’s going to take an escalated pushback, and those of us who support Palestine need to seize the moment. People can’t temper their activism.

The Shift: Columbia students boo school president, cheer Mahmoud Khalil at graduation

By Michael Arria 

 May 22, 2025 

MONDOWEISS

Interim Columbia University president Claire Shipman at the school’s graduation ceremony (Photo: Twitter/CU Apartheid Divest (CUAD))

Columbia University held its graduation ceremony this week. When acting school president Claire Shipman addressed the crowd, she was met with a loud chorus of boos and “Free Mahmoud!” chants.

“Good morning, Class of 2025. I know that many of you feel some amount of frustration with me, and I know you feel it with the administration,” she told the students.

Shipman’s attempt to separate the two entities was met with louder boos, and why wouldn’t it be? Since Columbia students erected a Gaza Solidarity Encampment last spring, the school has worked to stifle pro-Palestinian activism on campus.

Just days before Mahmoud Khalil was kidnapped and sent to a detention center in Louisiana, Columbia unveiled a new ICE protocol and reversed the school’s previous status as a “sanctuary campus,” allowing federal agents onto campus in certain situations.

Around the same time as Khalil’s arrest, the Trump administration sent the school an open letter implying that the president might rethink his decision to cut $400 million in (congressionally approved) federal grants to Columbia if it stepped up its crackdown on Gaza protesters.

“We expect your immediate compliance,” read the letter.

A short time later, Columbia was announcing a new round of suspensions, expulsions, and temporary degree revocations for student activists. This included the firing and expulsion of Grant Miner, president of the school’s student workers’ union. The organization was set to begin contract negotiations with the school the next day.

“The shocking move is part of a wave of crackdowns on free speech against students and workers who have spoken out and protested for peace and against the war on Gaza,” said the union in a statement. “As the UAW has emphasized, the assault on First Amendment rights being jointly committed by the federal government and Columbia University are an attack on all workers who dare to protest, speak out, or exercise their freedom of association under the US Constitution.”

The White House hasn’t stopped claiming that the university is a hotbed of rabid antisemitism. However, they have expressed support for some of the school’s recent moves on this issue.

Earlier this month, student activists occupied the school’s Butler Library in solidarity with the people of Gaza. The NYPD was immediately called in and arrested dozens of protesters. Columbia quickly suspended a number of students, including some who happened to be in the library but did not participate in the action.

Shipman said she called the cops because the students were causing “substantial chaos” and blamed the protesters for Trump’s targeting of activists.

“I am deeply disturbed at the idea that, at a moment when our international community feels particularly vulnerable, a small group of students would choose to make our institution a target,” read her statement.

The White House has not stopped attacking Columbia as a hotbed of antisemitism, but these recent suspensions did impress the Trump team.

In a recent statement, the Trump administration’s “antisemitism task force” said that Shipman “has met the moment with fortitude and conviction.”

Boo, indeed.

The People’s University for Palestine held an alternative graduation ceremony at the school. Dr. Noor Abdalla, Mahmoud Khalil’s wife, accepted a diploma on his behalf while holding their newborn child, Deen.

“Every day since Deen was born, I understand more and more why the struggle matters. I hope he grows up to be as brave as his father and as brave as every single student here who has risked so much — your education, your safety, even your futures — to speak up for Palestine,” said Abdalla. “Today we honor not only Mahmoud, but all of the students who were wrongfully expelled and suspended for standing up in support of Palestinian rights.”
Rubio testimony

This week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio defended the Trump administration’s foreign policy in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

He was interrupted twice by activists, who shouted about Gaza before being dragged away by security.

“I am sick and tired of waking up every day and seeing babies and children being killed with our tax money,” said Ahmed El-Masry, one of the protesters, “Our government has forced us to be complicit in this slaughter. Marco Rubio has the power to end this genocide—we need an arms embargo now to stop the starvation, stop the bombing, and Free Palestine.”

Rubio was grilled by Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), but not before an extremely on-brand preface.

“You and I served together in Congress for 15 years,” explained Van Hollen. “We didn’t always agree, but I believe we shared some common values — a belief in defending democracy and human rights abroad and honoring the Constitution at home. That’s why I voted to confirm you. I believed you would stand up for those principles. You haven’t. You’ve done the opposite.”

Lucy pulled the football away from Charlie Brown yet again.

In addition to criticizing Trump’s cuts to foreign aid and his immigration policies, Van Hollen also cited the case of Rumeysa Ozturk, the Tufts University doctoral student who was kidnapped off the street in Massachusetts and sent to a Louisiana detention facility for the crime of writing an Op-Ed that called on her school to divest from Israel.

In his May 9 ruling, U.S. District Court Judge William K. Sessions III said the State Department had produced no evidence connecting Ozturk to actual crimes and warned that her detention could have a chilling effect on the “millions and millions of individuals in this country who are not citizens.”

When asked about Ozturk, Rubio told Van Hollen, “A visa — it is not a right, it is a privilege. If you’re coming to the U.S. to lead campus crusades, to take over libraries, to try to burn down buildings, and commit acts of violence, we are not going to give you a visa.”

Absolutely none of this applies to Ozturk. She’s back home precisely because Rubio is incapable of producing a single shred of evidence justifying her detainment. Last month, the Washington Post reported that the government knew it had nothing on her prior to her arrest, but proceeded to target her anyway.

Despite a string of legal setbacks for the Trump team in these high-profile cases, Rubio vowed to carry out more illegal kidnappings.

“We’re going to do more,” he explained. “There are more coming. We’re going to revoke the visas of people who are here as guests and are disrupting our higher education facilities.”

“Writing an Op-Ed for the Tufts newspaper is disrupting the foreign policy of the United States?,” responded Van Hollen. “That’s pathetic, Mr. Secretary.”

Rubio faced more questions on Ozturk the next day, this time from Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA).

“Mr. Secretary, do you really think that Ms Ozturk’s Op-Ed results in a foreign policy consequence for the United States?” Jayapal asked Rubio. “Where in the Constitution does it say that the secretary of state can override First Amendment protections of free speech?”

“There is no constitutional right to a student visa,” Rubio responded. “It is a privilege We deny visas every day all over the world.”

“If these are legitimate law enforcement agents carrying out proper arrests, why are they hiding their identities?” Jayapal shot back.

Columbia President Greeted With Chants of 'Free Mahmoud!' During Graduation Speech

"You arrested us!" graduates shouted at one point in acting president Claire Shipman's address.


A Columbia University graduate wears a keffiyeh during a commencement ceremony in solidarity with Palestinians in New York City on May 19, 2025.
(Photo: Selcuk Acar/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Julia Conley
May 20, 2025
COMMON DREAMS

Columbia University administrators seemed intent on proceeding with an undergraduate commencement ceremony Tuesday as though the Ivy League school hasn't been at the center of student-led anti-genocide protests and government efforts to crack down on free speech for more than a year—but graduating students ensured the school's treatment of student organizers was front-and-center.

As acting president Claire Shipman approached the podium to address students at Columbia College's graduation, she was immediately met with loud booing.

She addressed the response, saying she knows many students feel "some amount of frustration" with her and the administration—but many of the graduates appeared uninterested in hearing from the university leader less than two weeks after she authorized the New York Police Department to enter the campus and arrest dozens of student protesters for occupying the university library in solidarity with Palestinians.

The Trump administration announced shortly after the arrests that they were reviewing the visa status of the student protesters—their latest escalation against pro-Palestinian organizers at the school.

"You arrested us!" graduates shouted at one point in Shipman's address, as she congratulated the Class of 2025 for making it "through one of the most rigorous schools in the world."

Mahmoud Khalil, the 2024 graduate who helped lead negotiations with administrators last year regarding divestment from Israel's military operation in Gaza, was also top-of-mind for many students who started chanting, "Free Mahmoud!" early in Shipman's speech.

"The work of your generation will be to shape these interesting times," Shipman said as the chants rang out.

More than two months after immigration agents arrested Khalil outside his on-campus apartment, he remains in detention in a Louisiana Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility. University trustees allegedly gave Khalil's name to the Trump administration ahead of his detention and the Trump administration's revocation of his green card, and administrators did not provide him with protection earlier this year when he told them he feared being swept up in the White House's plans to crack down on free speech.

The Trump administration is pushing to deport Khalil, claiming the pro-Palestinian views he expressed at student protests are detrimental to U.S. foreign policy interests. Khalil was one of thousands of U.S. college students who took part in protests calling for schools to divest from companies that benefit from Israel's assault on Gaza, which has killed more than 53,000 Palestinians in 19 months and has included a blockade on humanitarian aid, pushing the civilian population toward famine.

Since stepping in as acting president in March, Shipman has met with faculty that object to Columbia's capitulation to the Trump administration; mentioned the names of Khalil and Mohsen Mahdawi, another student who was marked for deportation but subsequently freed; and started a website for students who fear deportation.

But students' response on Tuesday suggested they've taken more notice of Shipman's summoning of the NYPD earlier this month and the school's agreement to the Trump administration's demands aimed at rooting out what the White House claims is "antisemitism"—including imposing a ban on masks, appointing an administrator to oversee Middle Eastern and Palestinian studies, and hiring dozens of "special officers" authorized to swiftly remove students from campus.

Students erupted in jeers and laughs when Shipman praised the Class of 2025 for being "curious, determined, and open-minded," and again chanted, "Free Mahmoud!" at another point in the speech.

A larger commencement ceremony is scheduled for Wednesday. Columbia University Apartheid Divest called on members of the school community to attend a protest action coinciding with the graduation.

"No commencement as usual under genocide," read a social media post announcing the protest.

US Politicians smear the Palestine movement after two Israeli Embassy staffers killed in D.C.

Pro-Israel groups and lawmakers are calling the killing of two Israeli Embassy staffers in Washington, DC an antisemitic attack and have attempted to blame it on the campus Gaza protests of the past 18 months.

By Michael Arria 

 May 22, 2025 
MONDOWEISS

The Capital Jewish museum in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Mdy66, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons)

Two Israeli Embassy staffers were killed in a shooting outside the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, DC, on Wednesday night. The American Jewish Committee (AJC) was hosting an event at the building.

The victims were Yaron Lischinsky, 30, and Sarah Milgrim, 26. According to Israel’s ambassador to the U.S. they were a “young couple about to be engaged.”

“The event had just wrapped up. A couple of us were touring the galleries upstairs and out of nowhere, we hear a series of loud bangs, just ‘boom, boom, boom,’ one after the other. And my friend was like ‘were those gunshots?’ And I was like ‘no, no, no that was just construction we’re fine,’” a witness told CNN.

“Then we went downstairs to the main lobby where the event was held,” he continued. “A man rushed in and said he had dislocated his shoulder, said there were indeed gunshots. Security at the event ushered us quickly back into a safe location behind the main room, and we were there for a few minutes.”

Elias Rodriguez, a 30-year-old male, is the sole suspect in the shooting. He was detained by police shortly after the killing without resistance. Police are currently searching a Chicago home believed to be his residence.

According to the Metropolitan Police Department chief Pamel Smith, Rodriguez said, “Free, free Palestine” in custody. A witness claimed she heard the suspect exclaim, ““I did it for Gaza” after the shooting.

“Israeli diplomats and representatives around the world stand on the frontlines of Israel’s diplomatic efforts — defending the country with their very lives,” said the Israeli Foreign Ministry in a statement. “We will not be deterred by terror. We will continue our mission across the globe, with unwavering commitment to represent Israel with pride.”

Pro-Israel groups and lawmakers immediately tagged the killing as an antisemitic attack and some connected it to the Gaza protests of the past 18 months.

“These horrible D.C. killings, based obviously on antisemitism, must end, NOW!,” wrote President Donald Trump on Truth Social. “Hatred and Radicalism have no place in the USA. Condolences to the families of the victims. So sad that such things as this can happen! God Bless You ALL!”

“Antisemitism has no place in our nation, and its rise must be urgently crushed by people of goodwill across America and throughout the world,” said Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY).

“This sickening shooting seems to be another horrific instance of antisemitism which as we know is all too rampant in our society,” wrote Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY).

“There is a direct line connecting antisemitic and anti-Israeli incitement to this murder,” said Israel’s Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar at a news conference in Jerusalem. “This incitement is also done by leaders and officials of many countries and international organizations, especially from Europe.”

“When people chant slogans about murder, when they take the side of terrorists, when they march in the street calling for violence, this is the outcome,” AJC CEO Ted Deutch told MSNBC.

Democratic Majority for Israel (DMFI) called the killing “a targeted act of antisemitism and terror.”

Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) said it was a “direct and deadly result of a relentless global campaign to demonize Jews and Israel.”

“Since October 7, antisemitism has surged across the country,” tweeted the Congress member. “On college campuses, in the streets, and across social media, antisemitism isn’t just spreading — it’s being tolerated, normalized, and even celebrated. It’s disgusting and completely unacceptable.”

“The domestic progressive/intifada movement is going to devolve into the Weather Underground very rapidly, and it’s going to get MUCH worse unless we really crack down on these people,” tweeted NYC Council member Vickie Paladino. “The DSA, WFP, SJP, People’s Forum, and a dozen other leftist political organizations are deeply involved with pushing terrorism. They need to be treated accordingly.”

Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) called for a Justice Department investigation into how the suspect was radicalized and what groups he is part of.

“The leftist media’s demonization of the Jews and Israel continues to have deadly consequences,” said the Senator.

The killing and such calls come amid a nationwide crackdown on Palestine activism. At a congressional hearing this week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio vowed to deport more student protesters.

“We’re going to do more,” said Rubio. “There are more coming. We’re going to revoke the visas of people who are here as guests and are disrupting our higher education facilities.”

Opinion...

Once again, Netanyahu plays the victim card

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrives for a speech at his Jerusalem office on March 14, 2020 [GALI TIBBON/AFP via Getty Images]

by Ibrahim Hewitt
ibrahimhewitt56
May 25, 2025 

MEMO


Once again, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has played the victim card, claiming that Hamas wants to “destroy the Jewish state” and “annihilate the Jewish people”. His comments came in response to criticism of the “plausible genocide” that Israel is carrying out in occupied Palestine, criticism that arose not in the Arab world — where Arab Zionists are dominant— but in the UK, France and Canada. “I could never understand how this simple truth evades the leaders” of these three countries, added Netanyahu.

His “simple truth” is, of course neither simple nor the truth. It is an attempt to divert attention from the fact that ever since it surfaced at the end of the 19th century in Theodor Herzl’s book The Jewish State, political Zionism has always depended on the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, leaving the land free for Jewish settlers to take over and create a nominally Jewish state, which is in fact a “bastion of European civilisation in a sea of barbarism”. It has been sustained by Western neo-imperialists.

Moreover, Netanyahu turns reality on its head with his claims about the Islamic Resistance Movement seeking to “destroy the Jewish state” and “annihilate the Jewish people”, because it has been Israel’s objective from even before the date of its “independence” (from whom?) on 15 May, 1948 to destroy any possibility of there being a viable Palestinian state (or “Arab state”, as the 1947 UN Partition Plan described it). And, as we have seen over the past 77 years and counting, Israel has been trying to annihilate the Palestinian people constantly, either by killing them or driving them out of the land.

It has done this through state terrorism, for which it basically wrote the handbook. Terrorist acts committed by Zionist terror groups led by the likes of Menachem Begin (Irgun) and Yitzhak Shamir (the Stern Gang), both of whom became prime minister of the settler-colonial, Zionist state, targeted first the British Mandate authorities and UN officials, before turning full on against the people of Palestine. A list of some of the atrocities committed by Zionist terrorists since the 1940s is contained in my article here.

For Netanyahu to make his claim even as his army, air force and navy are engaged in slaughtering Palestinian civilians in Gaza (while his occupation forces and illegal Jewish settlers carry out terrorist acts against the Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, the so-called “silent genocide”) is outrageous, but we shouldn’t be surprised. He is a seasoned liar, accusing Keir Starmer, Emmanuel Macron and Mark Carney of “emboldening Hamas to fight for ever”, and describing the resistance fighters as “mass murderers, rapists, baby killers and kidnappers”. And yet it is Israeli soldiers who have killed at least 17,500 Palestinian children — including countless babies — over the past 18 months or so (Israel has actually killed a Palestinian child on average every 2.5 days for the past 25 years); Israeli soldiers who are raping and assaulting Palestinian prisoners sexually, male and female alike; and the occupation state which is holding thousands of Palestinians with neither charge nor trial.

Furthermore, he leads a country which has never stated where its borders are, and has pushed the nominal borders ever outward into Arab and Palestinian territory; it’s a country which is aiming for the Zionists’ dream: Greater Israel controlling territory across a huge swathe of the Middle East, including Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq. Netanyahu and his predecessors have been emboldened in this by successive US presidents and other Western leaders, including those whom he now berates.

By playing the victim card, Netanyahu hopes to convince people that it is the Palestinians who are trying to steal Israeli land and “annihilate” Israelis when, in fact, the opposite is true. Numerous statements by members of his far-right coalition government confirm their genocidal intent, as if further evidence was needed. It isn’t, or shouldn’t be. Ethnic cleansing has always been the Zionist modus operandi. The 1948 Nakba — Catastrophe — wasn’t a one-off event; it is ongoing. What happened on 7 October was a symptom of Israel’s occupation and colonisation of Palestine, not the catalyst for Israel’s brutal, genocidal offensive in which at least 54,000 Palestinians have been killed and an estimated 11,000 are missing, presumed dead, under the rubble of their homes and other civilian infrastructure destroyed by Israel.

Genocide has been happening in plain sight for decades in all but name; the whole apparatus of occupation has been established and developed with one purpose in mind: to steal as much Palestinian land as possible, and kill or expel as many Palestinians as possible. The ongoing events in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, as well as Gaza, demonstrate that.

Claims that Israel is merely acting in “self-defence” would be laughable if not so serious. Apart from anything else, an occupation state has no right to make such a claim about its actions against the people suffering under its military occupation.

An International Criminal Court arrest warrant for Netanyahu is still in force for “war crimes” in the Gaza Strip. But you don’t need to be killing and starving people to death in order to be committing a war crime. Every Israeli settlement on Palestinians territory is a war crime; every Jewish settler living in a settlement is a war crime; every Palestinian detained in the occupied territories but held in an Israeli prison is a war crime. Israel has been committing war crimes for decades; the current genocide has been livestreamed on social media. Netanyahu and his Zionist apologists can’t hide that brutal reality. That, not his spurious claims about Hamas, is the “simple truth” that he wishes we would all evade. But we won’t.

With Israel also facing charges of genocide at the International Court of Justice, the end of both Netanyahu and his racist, apartheid state can only be a matter of time. He has surely played the victim card once too often. Nobody with any credibility believes a word that he says.

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

Opinion

Extermination as negotiation: Understanding Israel’s strategy in Gaza

Whether it's total conquest or managed containment, Israel doesn't have a single grand strategy for Gaza, but it uses the possibility of both to prolong the war.

By Abdaljawad Omar

May 23, 2025 

MONDOWEISS

Bodies arrive at Nasser Hospital in Kha Younis following Israeli airstrikes on tent encampments, May 20, 2025. (Photo: Moaz Abu Taha/APA Images)

In the weeks since the unveiling of “Operation Gideon’s Chariots,” the renewed Israeli offensive to permanently “conquer” all of Gaza, it has become increasingly clear that Israel’s internal decision-making is not oriented toward a singular strategic endgame, but toward a recursive logic of exhaustion.

Israel isn’t choosing between total conquest and technocratic containment via an Arab-brokered ceasefire plan. Instead, it is deploying these options as devices to stretch the war and weaponize its duration rather than end it. Neither is an actual alternative to the other.

This is not a paradox, but a method. “Gideon’s Chariots,” with its objective to concentrate over two million Palestinians in Rafah and “cleanse” the remainder of Gaza, is not merely a plan of conquest. It is a fantasy of sterilization dressed in logistical rationality. Its brutality lies not only in its intentions — military and demographic — but also in its open-endedness, because it will be an occupation without governance or responsibility.

It imagines Gaza as a surgical field: empty of social density and politics, a flattened terrain where the Israeli army may operate unhindered and where civilians are transformed into captives or debris. This is where extermination can proceed behind the veil of humanitarian logistics. But this is the thing: while Israel announces its plan and leaks many of its contours, making sure that the endgame of extermination is out in the open, it also delays its fulfillment.

The rejection of the Egyptian proposal for Gaza’s postwar governance, meanwhile, functions less as a strategic rebuttal and more as a temporal maneuver: it defers the stabilization of Gaza, suspends the possibility of a postwar architecture, and secures Israel’s role as the sole arbiter of movement, aid, reconstruction, and survival. The proposal — which secured the backing of the Arab League — offered a ceasefire, the release of prisoners, and the creation of a Palestinian technocratic administration in Gaza under regional and international auspices. The governing authority would be civilian, non-Hamas, and possibly linked to the Palestinian Authority. Arab security forces, primarily from Egypt and the UAE, would maintain public order. Israel, in theory, would retain the ability to strike if Hamas rearmed, but the core logic was one of pacified governance and externally monitored reconstruction.

But this alternative, while marketed as pragmatic containment, reveals its own structure of control. It does not offer Palestinains liberation or sovereignty. It does not restore Palestinian political life. Instead, it imagines a depoliticized Gaza, administered through foreign technocrats, where governance is reduced to management and resistance is metabolized into security threats.

Yes, it ends the massacres, but it continues the process of unmaking through other means. Yes, it stops ethnic cleansing and genocide, but it only offers a minimum respite.

In this scenario, the Palestinian is rendered administrable but unrepresentable — visible in spreadsheets and surveillance systems, but invisible as a subject of history. Where “Gideon’s Chariots” proposes the elimination of the interlocutor, the Egyptian plan offers their neutralization. Where the former seeks erasure, the latter guarantees containment.

In this way, Israel is not simply fighting Hamas. It is managing the time of collapse of Gaza’s infrastructure, of regional diplomacy, and of its own internal contradictions. The so-called “plans” it circulates are not blueprints for action, but instruments of disorientation. By alternating between military escalation and diplomatic non-engagement, Israel traps adversaries and allies alike in a theatre of endless anticipation.

These plans become not resolutions, but literal traps: they embolden some, humiliate others, and erode the coherence of any alternative vision. But Israel remains within the suspended terrain of both plans. On the one hand, it seeks to retrieve its prisoners before completely wiping out Gaza. On the other, it aims to appease the Arab governments that have remained silent, have not severed their ties with Israel, and have gradually — though assuredly — offered an alternative to genocide through a politics of sterilization. Not to mention that the prospect of completely undoing the people of Gaza remains alive, serving Netanyahu’s own management of his coalition and his desire to emerge as a historic leader who decisively ended the Palestine question.

Nowhere is this more evident than in Israel’s relationship with the Gulf states. By signaling openness to normalization and regional security arrangements — while simultaneously deepening the humanitarian catastrophe — Israel forestalls clear ultimatums. The prospect of a reconfigured Gaza under Arab oversight is floated as a hypothetical, a distant possibility, while irreversible facts are manufactured on the ground: entire neighborhoods are erased, populations displaced, infrastructure reduced to dust.

Behind the language of planning lies a campaign of sterilization and condensation — a vision of Gaza not as a home, but as a holding site. Leaked reports whisper of forced transfers, of Palestinians being sent to Libya or elsewhere in Africa, sketching futures of removal dressed in the language of pragmatism. In other words, Israel maneuvers, cajoles, agrees, renges, returns to blood, and ultimately remains hesitant in fulfilling even its own plans.

But even this strategy shows signs of fatigue. The army is stretched. Reservists are exhausted. Public support, once monolithic, is now fractured, especially around the government’s inability to recover Israeli prisoners and its disregard for their lives. The political elite may posture unity, but societal cohesion is fraying. The very trust that once linked military necessity to civil legitimacy is eroding.

These signs of erosion are not only internal. The longer the war continues, the more international legitimacy Israel forfeits. The ICC warrants, the ICJ rulings, the intensifying accusations of genocide — these are not merely moral censures, but signs of the beginnings of institutional isolation.

And yet, rather than shift course, Israel doubles down, leaning into ambiguity and attrition, hoping to exhaust global outrage the way it hopes to exhaust Palestinian resistance: through delay, confusion, the normalization of collapse, and of course, through coercion by the weaponization of antisemitism.

In this moment, what Israel seeks is a “stable instability” in which Gaza is rendered uninhabitable yet governed, massacred yet silent, present yet politically nullified. Both plans — the one it executes and the one it rejects — serve this grammar. Whether through total war or managed containment, the objective remains: to erase Palestine as a subject of history, and to replace it with a population that can be controlled, administered, or vanished. Whether this will succeed remains uncertain. But the cracks are visible in the disillusionment of soldiers and in the rage of Israeli prisoners’ families.

Ceasefire negotiations as a form of interrogation

The way in which Israel has conducted the ceasefire negotiations, caught in a perpetual cycle of proposals, rejections, the resumption of hostilities, and the insistence on non-starters, is rather like the dynamic between the Israeli interrogators of the Shin Bet and the Palestinian prisoners enduring their pressure tactics.

In the rooms of the Shin Bet, the manipulation of time becomes a weapon, and language becomes a tool of disorientation. Truth is not revealed through clarity or dialogue but extracted through exhaustion: physical torture, psychological games, the pretense of friendship, and promises that are easily betrayed. The goal is not to understand the subject but to unmake it — not just confession, but collapse.

“If you speak, I’ll give you a cigarette. If you name a name, you can rest. If you give us one person — just one — we might bring food, a blanket, or something to slow the cold.” Each gesture masquerades as mercy, each act tethered to the logic of the deal. It is governance through exhaustion.

But it is not merely the scene of interrogation. It is a relation in which massacre, negotiation, and measurement feed one another: the massacre produces the crisis that makes the negotiation legible; and the negotiation becomes the space in which the impact of violence is measured. Each Israeli bombing is followed not by silence, but by assessment: has the resistance softened? Has the community broken? Are they ready to concede?

Negotiation is not a deviation from violence; it is one of its modalities — strategic, affective, diagnostic. To speak of negotiation here is to speak of a calibration of ruin and the testing of spirit and fatigue. Just like the interrogator tests the limits of the prisoner’s endurance.

And still, within the dungeon, the Palestinian prisoner sometimes longs for the interrogator, because in a world of sealed doors and slow starvation, he becomes the only one who confirms that you still exist, the only sociality possible.

The irony is that the more weakness you show, the more they withhold. The more you comply, the tighter the screws become. That’s why it is not a negotiation of needs, but an architecture of humiliation calibrated to ensure that even your willingness to speak becomes a further mark of dispossession, or a moment to squeeze everything from the interlocutor and make sure he holds nothing back.

When analysts, diplomats, and commentators invoke the term “negotiations,” it is actually an interrogation, because its structure is designed to exhaust the other until they collapse. And when collapse does not suffice, elimination follows. In this paradigm, Israel does not seek interlocutors, but seeks the unraveling of those it summons to the table.

Beyond the binary

If Israeli negotiation operates as a form of interrogation, then it is equally vital to remember that Palestinians have not only recognized this structure but have also repeatedly sabotaged its operation. Indeed, the history of the Palestinian struggle is the history of refusing the terms of legibility imposed by the occupier: of speaking without permission, refusing speech when compelled, of surviving without seeking recognition. This is not romantic defiance. It is clarity forged under pressure. A political cunning formed in the prison cell, the interrogation chamber, the ruined home, and the negotiating table alike.

Palestinians have long been expected to perform their defeat, embodying restraint while rehearsing moderation and denouncing violence selectively. Yet time and again, these roles are declined. The prisoner who chooses silence over confession; the hunger striker who displaces the temporality of domination by submitting his body to time itself; the mother who insists on naming her dead child not as a victim, but as a martyr; the camp that refuses to dissolve into the dust of humanitarianism—these are not just acts of resistance, but refusals of capture.

It is precisely this refusal that breaks open the false binary that Israel now offers the world: between extermination and containment — “Gideon’s Chariots” and the Egyptian plan.

They aren’t alternatives to one another, but rather structural co-conspirators. One would eliminate Palestinians as subjects through military sterilization, and the other would disarm and administer them through international bureaucracy. One is an open genocide, and the other is a managed disappearance.

This binary is itself becoming unstable, because the fractures are now running through the moral architecture of the international order, daily unmasked in its complicity and selective grief. They run through Israel’s own foundations: a stretched military, an incoherent political leadership, and a society fracturing under the weight of unending war and the anticipation of the return of the messiah. The fractures run through every site where the binary of extermination or containment is refused, and where a third, fugitive possibility begins to flicker.

This third path, though not easily named, is already being lived. It pulses through global solidarity networks that no longer ask for permission but demand accountability. It grows in every courtroom where the word genocide is uttered — not as a metaphor, but as a legal charge. It lives in the recognition that Palestine is not a humanitarian crisis to be managed, but a political cause to be reclaimed.

It lives in the knowledge that Palestine has hollowed out the claims of the liberal order, exposed its foundations, and saturated its vocabulary — and still insists on its presence.

Abdaljawad Omar
Abdaljawad Omar is a Palestinian scholar and theorist whose work focuses on the politics of resistance, decolonization, and the Palestinian struggle.


Exterminating Gaza was always Israel’s plan, but now it’s official

Israel carried out its plan to erase Gaza over the course of 18 months. Now that the plan has clearly fallen into place, the Netanyahu government is openly discussing ethnic cleansing. And still, Israel enjoys complete international impunity.

By Qassam Muaddi

May 9, 2025 

MONDOWEISS

Aerial view of the destruction in Rafah on January 19, 2025, during the start of the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. (Photo: Omar Ashtawy/APA Images)


It has been a year since Israel first invaded Rafah and crossed Biden’s illusory “red line.” The Israeli army destroyed the Rafah crossing, isolating Gaza from Egypt and completely cutting it off from the outside world. Israel was free to conduct the mass displacement of Palestinians away from the Egyptian border, but it never admitted to that goal.

But now, Rafah is no more, and Israel’s recently approved plan to reoccupy Gaza indefinitely has made explicit what many have already expected for months: that the ulterior motive of creating permanent military installations and buffer zones in Gaza is to facilitate the mass expulsion of Palestinians.

Israel is now openly announcing its intentions and publicly advertising ethnic cleansing as “voluntary migration.” This didn’t happen overnight, but has been the result of a slow, deliberate process of hemming Palestinians into concentrated sub-ghettoes under fire while creating vast military buffer zones on swathes of flattened Gazan territory. The plan has been implemented in piecemeal over the past 18 months, but now those pieces are falling clearly into place.
Advertisement



🗓️ Sign up for the Daily Headlines newsletter. You'll get new stories delivered directly to your inbox every morning at 8 a.m. EST.

Subscribe

Just last week, Benjamin Netanyahu announced that Israel’s main war aim of “defeating its enemies” superseded the goal of releasing Israeli captives in Gaza, echoing previous statements from his Finance Minister, Bezalel Smotrich, the so-called hardliner.

This isn’t a new development. It has been Israel’s plan all along, but the Israeli government has had to stagger its implementation over the course of a year and a half due to a series of internal and external constraints. Yet it continued to set the stage for ethnic cleansing every step of the way.

The watershed moment came in February during the short-lived ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, when U.S. President Trump articulated his shocking plan for the U.S. to “own” Gaza and turn it into a “Riviera of the Middle East,” while the people of Gaza would be relocated elsewhere. Suddenly, the President of the United States was endorsing a plan that Israel had never dared voice in public. Even a month earlier, Netanyahu had said in a televised statement that “Israel has no intention of permanently reoccupying Gaza or displacing its civilian population.”

This is the exact plan that the Israeli war cabinet has just approved.

Since Trump made his February statement, which he later walked back, Israel has been emboldened to go full steam ahead with its plan. The resumption of the war and the blowing up of the ceasefire are partly informed by this newfound determination to see through Israel’s “final solution” for the Gaza question. The reason it is able to do it is because the international community has barely lifted a finger to stop it.

But Trump’s February announcement was not where Israel’s strategy to take over the strip and displace its people originated. Well before Israel was forced by Trump to enter into the ceasefire with Hamas, the army had thrown all its force behind a military plan proposed by a cohort of Israeli generals based on an earlier vision laid out by retired Israeli general Giora Eiland. Dubbed “the Generals’ Plan,” its aim was to completely depopulate northern Gaza through siege and starvation. The implementation of the plan included completely sealing off the 400,000 Palestinians residing in the area and leaving them without food, water, or medicine; a non-stop wave of demolitions and detonations of residential buildings and houses; widespread carpet-bombing; and the direct, forcible evacuation of schools-turned-shelters and hospitals in the north.

By the time the ceasefire was reached on January 19, the population of north Gaza had been reduced to less than 100,000. The last functioning hospital in the area, Kamal Adwan Hospital, was also forcibly evacuated following an 80-day siege and several direct attacks by Israeli drones. Israeli forces also abducted several members of the medical staff, including the hospital’s director, Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya, who continues to be detained by Israeli forces to this day.

The Generals’ Plan failed after hundreds of thousands of Palestinians returned to the north in a historic return march during the ceasefire, setting up camp beside the rubble of their homes and sending a clear message that their displacement had been anything but “voluntary.”

Israel’s plans for realizing its solution to the “Gaza problem” had been frustrated, and it was dragged into the ceasefire kicking and screaming. Israel continued to stall at every stage of the ceasefire, sabotaging it at every opportunity and refusing to enter into negotiations that would see a permanent end to the war. It continued to bide its time, waiting for an opening. Trump gave Israel the opening it needed in February, and Netanyahu’s war cabinet has been barreling through all internal obstacles within the Israeli political system ever since.
How Israel started implementing its ‘voluntary migration’ plan

In March, the Israeli Defense Ministry approved the creation of a special bureau to promote the expulsion of Palestinians. At the time, the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas was still in effect, albeit tenuously, as Israel refused to move to the second phase of the ceasefire talks, which would have involved negotiations over permanently ending the war. Five days after the ceasefire broke, U.S. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz was still saying that the idea of transferring Palestinians was “practical” and “realizable.”

Then, in early April, Israel revealed the carving out of a new militarized strip of land south of Khan Younis called the Morag Corridor, cutting off the southernmost Rafah governorate from the rest of Gaza. Everything south of Morag, including all of Rafah, was announced as part of a military buffer zone, reducing the surface of the Palestinian enclave by a fifth. This was made possible by Israel’s intensified bombing and demolition campaign of Rafah since the Israeli army invaded the governorate in May 2024, leveling all of the city’s infrastructure.

Israel’s Channel 12 reported that the aim of the Morag Corridor was to facilitate the “voluntary migration” of Palestinians, while Israel’s Defense Minister, Israel Katz, announced in a televised statement that the Israeli army was “cutting off” the continuity of the Gaza Strip and implementing the voluntary migration plan. Katz reiterated this plan weeks later, stating that Israel’s strategy in Gaza included destroying infrastructure, blocking the entry of humanitarian aid, and “promoting voluntary transfer.”
Who is responsible?

Since the beginning of Israel’s genocide in Gaza, Israel has revealed parts of its final plan in stages. At the start of the genocide, then Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said Israel was imposing a “total siege” on Gaza, preventing the entry of food, water, electricity, or fuel, and labeling Palestinians as “human animals.” The genocidal implications of the war’s endgame were apparent, but the unfolding of Israel’s plan in Gaza continued to be concealed politically by endless rhetoric about ceasefire talks, and even the release of Israeli captives. The Israeli government now makes no pretenses of the captives’ importance, after officially moving them to the bottom of the priority list of the war’s goals.

Every step of the way, Israel has met no practical consequences for its escalation, and no government with any leverage over Israel has moved to impose any political repercussions. Even the generalized official rejection by European and Arab governments of Trump’s Gaza plan wasn’t followed by any action. And of course, Israel’s refusal to move on to the second phase of the ceasefire and its constant violations of the truce were met with silence. That silence continues to be deafening as Israel carves the Morag Corridor, erases Rafah, and is now moving to do the same thing to other parts of Gaza.

Total impunity accompanied every one of Israel’s milestones in the march toward exterminating Gaza, from the hundreds of bombings of schools, hospitals, aid workers, paramedics, and journalists, to the deliberate starvation of Gaza’s population. Now, the permanency of Israel’s occupation of Gaza is official, and so is the stated aim of ethnically cleansing its people. And we still have no reaction.

The fact that the silence persists as Israel’s end goals have been made clear confirms that the extermination of Gaza was never the vision of the Israeli far-right, or even of Netanyahu personally; it was an international decision.

This must be the new realization that underlies any account of the destruction of Palestinian life, including the impending Israeli annexation of the West Bank and the full colonization of East Jerusalem, the Naqab, and any other part of historic Palestine where the Palestinian people still struggle to preserve their collective existence.

Qassam Muaddi
Qassam Muaddi is the Palestine Staff Writer for Mondoweiss. Follow him on Twitter/X at @QassaMMuaddi.

Israeli army controls 77% of Gaza: Media office


Palestinian residents flee the conflict zones by car, on donkey carts, and on foot, carrying their belongings to safer areas following intense Israeli military attacks on the Jabalia Refugee Camp in northern Gaza on May 21, 2025. [Saeed M. M. T. Jaras – Anadolu Agency]

May 25, 2025

 MEMO

The Israeli army controls over 77% of the Gaza Strip, local authorities said on Sunday, Anadolu reports.

“Field data and verified analysis indicate that the Israeli occupation forces now effectively control approximately 77% of Gaza’s total geographic area,” Gaza’s government media office said in a statement.

The Israeli army gained control through “direct ground offensives, the deployment of its forces in residential and civilian areas, or preventing Palestinians from accessing their areas, lands, and properties via intensified fire, or forced evacuation,” it added.

The office strongly condemned the Israeli plans of mass displacement, ethnic cleansing, systematic genocide, and settler colonialism by force, “under the cover of a siege and an open war targeting both people and infrastructure.”

It held Israel and its supporters, including the US, UK, Germany, and France, fully responsible for the crime of genocide in Gaza.

On Thursday, Israel Hayom newspaper said that the army plans to control 70-75% of Gaza within nearly three months as part of an expanded military campaign in the enclave.

Rejecting international calls for a ceasefire, the Israeli army has pursued a brutal offensive against Gaza since October 2023, killing more than 53,900 Palestinians, most of them women and children.

Last November, the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza.

Israel also faces a genocide case at the International Court of Justice for its war crimes against defenseless civilians in the enclave.

Head of controversial US-backed Gaza aid group resigns over 'humanitarian principles'

GHF director Jake Wood said it became impossible to work with the group due to concerns on impartiality, neutrality and humanitarian principles.

The New Arab Staff & Agencies
26 May, 2025


The hunger crisis in Gaza has been exacerbated by Israel's siege, ongoing since early March [Getty/file photo]

The head of a controversial US-backed group preparing to move aid into the Gaza Strip announced his abrupt resignation on Sunday, adding fresh uncertainty over the effort's future.

In a statement by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), executive director Jake Wood explained that he felt compelled to leave after determining the organisation could not fulfil its mission in a way that adhered to "humanitarian principles."

The foundation, which has been based in Geneva since February, has vowed to distribute some 300 million meals in its first 90 days of operation.

But the United Nations and traditional aid agencies have already said they will not cooperate with the group, amid accusations it is working with Israel.

The GHF has emerged as international pressure mounts on Israel over the conditions in Gaza, where it has pursued a deadly military onslaught in the Palestinian enclave for over 19 months.

A more than two-month total blockade on the territory only began to ease in recent days, as agencies warned of growing starvation risks. Dozens have already died from hunger since the siege.

"Two months ago, I was approached about leading GHF's efforts because of my experience in humanitarian operations" Wood said.

"Like many others around the world, I was horrified and heartbroken at the hunger crisis in Gaza and, as a humanitarian leader, I was compelled to do whatever I could to help alleviate the suffering."

Wood stressed that he was "proud of the work I oversaw, including developing a pragmatic plan that could feed hungry people, address security concerns about diversion, and complement the work of longstanding NGOs in Gaza."

But, he said, it had become "clear that it is not possible to implement this plan while also strictly adhering to the humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality, and independence, which I will not abandon".

Gaza's health ministry said Sunday that at least 3,785 people had been killed in the territory since a ceasefire collapsed on 18 March, taking the war's overall toll to 53,939, mostly civilians.

Wood called on Israel "to significantly expand the provision of aid into Gaza through all mechanisms" while also urging "all stakeholders to continue to explore innovative new methods for the delivery of aid, without delay, diversion, or discrimination."

Israel’s new Gaza aid system likened to 'concentration camps’

Insiders in the Israeli military and the Israel-backed NGO set to take control of Gaza aid delivery have expressed doubts about the plan amid a chaotic rollout.

The New Arab Staff
25 May, 2025


Israel began allowing 'teaspoons' of aid into Gaza this week following a suffocating 11-week siege. [Getty]

Israel's drive to overhaul relief efforts in Gaza is running into significant problems, with insiders expressing doubts about its feasibility and worrying about the optics of militarising humanitarian aid, according to The Washington Post.

Internal planning in the murky organisation set to take control of aid delivery in the Strip - the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation - has been beset with uncertainty, while divisions have surfaced in the Israeli military amid confusion about its objectives, sources tell the newspaper.

The Netanyahu government had planned to begin imposing the new system this week but has been forced to push back the date amid what has reportedly been a "rushed and chaotic" rollout.

Drawn up by Israeli officials in November and approved by ministers this month, the plan will hand responsibility for the humanitarian effort to the GHF, which will work alongside the Israeli military and American mercenaries.

The hundreds of aid distribution hubs currently operated by relief agencies will be shrunk to just four GHF-run centres. Each of them will be situated in the south of the strip, forcing Palestinians in the north to leave.

Internal documents seen by The Washington Post show that biometric technology will be deployed at the hubs, handing the Israeli military power to choose who is allowed to receive aid.

There are plans to construct guarded "humanitarian transition areas", where tens of thousands of Palestinians will be held. Planners anticipate these zones to be described as "concentration camps" by the public, the documents show.

Five people involved in the planning expressed concern about the militarisation of aid, and the use of mercenary forces and biometrics to police civilians.

The scheme has triggered outcry among some of Israel's closest Western allies and humanitarian organisations, who have refused to cooperate with a plan that they say violates basic humanitarian principles.

The UN has warned that the policy has been designed to facilitate the mass displacement of Palestinians, an accusation effectively confirmed by Israeli ministers who have publicly articulated plans to drive the entire population to the south and force them out of Gaza.

Israel has justified the plan by claiming that Hamas is stealing aid to finance its operations. It has never provided evidence for its claims.

Officials have also framed it as a humanitarian initiative to help Palestinian civilians, who are threatened with mass starvation due to Israel's suffocating 11-week blockade. Authorities this week began allowing the entry of some aid in amounts described by the UN secretary-general as a "teaspoon".

The ongoing blockade and aid restrictions in Gaza have pushed the population to the brink of famine.

According to the WHO, dozens of children have died from malnutrition, and hospitals are overwhelmed. The UN warns that 500–600 aid trucks are needed daily. Aid agencies say the crisis is worsening by the day, with over 70,000 children now at risk of acute malnutrition.

The refusal of aid agencies to cooperate with the scheme has reportedly left the organisation without a plan to distribute the necessary amount of aid.


Red flags about the organisation's capacity were raised earlier this month after a leaked memo revealed that it plans to provide food to only 60% of the population initially.

How the GHF will be funded remains unclear. The UAE - one of the key backers named in the planning documents - has refused to participate. Other potential donors such as the European Union, the United Kingdom, and Germany have signed a statement criticising the plan.

A GHF spokesperson said the organisation had received a $100 million donation but declined to disclose the donor's identity.

The organisation also appears to still be without a director. David Beasley, a former head of the World Food Programme, was reported to be in discussions for the position, but according to The Washington Post is reluctant to get involved due to the many unanswered questions about the operation.

The confusion about how the scheme will function also extends to the top of the Israeli military itself, which has been deeply divided about the government's intent to occupy the whole of Gaza.

Eyal Zamir, the IDF's chief of staff, admitted just two weeks ago in private conversations that he did not understand how the military will work with the mercenary forces on the ground, according to the newspaper.

Some officers have reportedly expressed opposition to the plan and want the current UN-led humanitarian system to remain in place.

"It’s not going to work," said a former chief of Israeli military intelligence with knowledge of the plans.

"Set aside the humanitarian issues, the moral issues, simply the logistics of transferring people to a permanent location - it’s a huge transfer of people who have already been moved once."

Israel’s aid plan for Gaza is a key part of its strategy to expel Palestinians

Israel's plan to handle the distribution of aid in Gaza via a U.S. private contractor is a key part of its plan to ethnically cleanse its population. Here's how.

By Qassam Maddi

May 22, 2025 0
MONDOWEISS

Palestinians wait in long queues to receive pots of food distributed by charitable organizations, Gaza City, May 21, 2025. (Photo: Omar Ashtawy/APA Images)

The forcible expulsion of the Palestinian people is now the explicit goal of Israel’s war on Gaza. Late on Wednesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israel would only end the war if “Hamas surrenders, Gaza is demilitarized, and we implement the Trump plan.”

Trump walked back his February plan for the U.S. to “own” Gaza, expel its people, and turn it into a “Riviera of the Middle East,” but Netanyahu seized upon it all the same and took it as a green light to exterminate Gaza. The latest phase in this plan is Israel’s weaponization of humanitarian aid for the purpose of furthering the Gaza final solution.

The plan is simple: starve Gaza’s population, and only create one designated flattened stretch of land where they can come to get food rations — facilitated by the Israeli army and run by a U.S. private contractor. Gaza’s population will be forced to go to these collection points, where they will be corralled inside what would effectively be a concentration camp, located in what used to be the city of Rafah, now a flattened wasteland.

Netanyahu made all this clear in his latest announcement, which came a day after Israel said it would allow “minimal” amounts of humanitarian aid into Gaza for “diplomatic reasons” — to avoid war crimes charges and images of famine.

On Monday, the Israeli war cabinet finally approved the entry of the aid, after two months of a complete Israeli blockade on the besieged territory. This forced starvation has led to the spread of hunger and disease, with the Gaza Government Media Office reporting that at least 70,000 Palestinian children have been hospitalized for severe malnutrition.

The cabinet decision followed intense negotiations with Hamas in Qatar, with the mediation of the Gulf state, and pressure from the U.S. envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff. The talks started following Hamas’s release of Israeli-American soldier Edan Alexander earlier last week.

The U.S. reportedly pressured Israel into sending a negotiating team, which later led to the decision to allow the entry of food.

Talks continue to be held over the possibility of a ceasefire, with the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insisting that Israel will not commit to ending the war and will retain control of Gaza. Hamas insists on U.S. guarantees and a UN Security Council Resolution that Israel will not restart its assault on Gaza after the release of Israeli captives. However, for the time being, Palestinians in Gaza are expected to receive some relief from starvation, as Israel has already begun to allow a small number of food trucks to enter the Strip.

On Tuesday, the UN said that the nine trucks that Israel allowed to enter the day before represented “a drop in the ocean” of the needs of the devastated population. But the quantity of the aid allowed into Gaza is not the only concern looming around the issue. An additional fear is rising that aid might be used as a tool for Israel to achieve its primary wartime goal — to facilitate the expulsion of Palestinians out of Gaza.
Israel’s goal: Ethnic cleansing

When Israel announced its latest offensive aiming to control all of Gaza, dubbed operation “Gideon’s Chariot,” Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot reported that one of the phases of the the operation would include transferring the majority of the Palestinian population to the south of the Strip, especially in the Rafah area. These reports appeared simultaneously alongside Netanyahu’s statements to Israeli reservists last week that Israel aims to force Palestinians out of Gaza, and that the main obstacle is finding countries willing to accept them. The concentration of Palestinians in southern Gaza is seen by most analysts as a preparatory step for forcing them out. It is believed that this new plan to deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza might be the last piece of this strategy.

This strategic use of food distribution has been discussed by the Israeli war cabinet since last year, months before the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas was reached. In September 2024, Netanyahu was already discussing the best mechanism to allow the distribution of aid in the north of Gaza, where the Israeli army was planning an expansion of its ground operations at the time. Netanyahu said in a cabinet meeting that the Israeli army will “take responsibility” for distributing aid in the areas where it was also focused on defeating the Palestinian resistance.

The Israeli newspaper Makor Rishon reported at the time that the Israeli Prime Minister was following the suggestions of his hardline far-right cabinet allies, Itamar Ben-Gvir, Bezalel Smotrich, and Orit Strock, who reportedly supported the Israeli army’s control of aid distribution, as part of a larger plan of expanding the ground assault on the northern part of the strip. The newspaper quoted Smotrich referring to the plan as “a strategic change” that would “bring the military effort to its maximum” in order to defeat Hamas.

Two months later, the Israeli army sealed off the entire northern Gaza governorate, causing an immediate drop in the quantity of food available and pushing some 400,000 Palestinians to the edge of starvation as part of what was known as “the Generals’ Plan,” designed to force Palestinians out of northern Gaza. This effort caused the population of northern Gaza to plummet below 100,000, reaching as low as 75,000, according to some reports. Israel was never able to implement that plan’s vision of controlling aid distribution because the blockade of the north alone drove most of the population out of the area, and the ceasefire was eventually reached in mid-January.
New aid plan

Even though the Israeli war cabinet approved the entry of aid trucks on Monday, the actual implementation of the entry of aid has been gradual. On Thursday, the Gaza Government Media Office announced that some trucks arrived in the Strip for distribution three days after they were due.

International organizations, including UN bodies such as UNRWA and the World Food Programme (WFP), have traditionally been key players in aid distribution in Gaza. But minutes following the cabinet’s decision this week, the Times of Israel reported that Israel would be adopting a new mechanism to distribute aid through the Israeli army, bypassing international organizations.

The most important component of this new mechanism is that aid wouldn’t be distributed to all parts of the Gaza Strip, but to specific distribution points where Palestinians would be required to move to receive it.

This Israeli plan has actually been previously announced as a joint U.S.-Israeli plan, which included the distribution of aid determined by limited rations to households. In Israel’s new plan, rather than working with traditional aid groups, the distribution would be organized by the recently established, U.S.-based Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. On May 4, international organizations present in Gaza unanimously voiced their rejection of the plan in a joint statement, saying that “it contravenes fundamental humanitarian principles and appears designed to reinforce control over life-sustaining items as a pressure tactic as part of a military strategy.”

The statement was followed on May 6 by a statement by UN aid teams, who said the plan “appears to be a deliberate attempt to weaponize the aid.”

A month earlier, on April 8, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres rejected Israeli control over aid distribution in Gaza, stating that it risks “further controlling and callously limiting aid down to the last calorie and grain of flour.” Guterres added that the UN “will not participate in any arrangement that does not fully respect the humanitarian principles: humanity, impartiality, independence, and neutrality.”
Meanwhile, Gaza starves

As Israel continues to be formally engaged in ceasefire talks with Hamas in Qatar, its decision to allow the entry of aid was presented as a step forward in the effort to end the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. However, if carried out according to Israel’s plan, the delivery of aid itself could become another step in the ongoing Israeli strategy to fulfill its now explicit goal of expelling the strip of its Palestinian population.

In the meantime, hunger in the strip accentuates by the minute, claiming so far the lives of at least 57 Palestinians, mostly children, since October 2023 according to the Palestinian health ministry, and provoking the miscarriage of 300 pregnant women due to lack of nutrients. Gaza’s government media office also said that an unspecified number of elderly people had died due to the lack of medicines, in the same time period.

All of this continues as Israeli forces escalate airstrikes across the strip, killing 82 Palestinians in the past 24 hours (Tuesday to Wednesday), according to the Palestinian health ministry. Since October 2023, the Israeli assault on Gaza has officially killed more than 53,000 Palestinians, with most estimates of the genocide’s total toll being much higher.

'Dangerous and destructive': The US-backed Gaza aid plan undermines humanitarian standards, aligns with Israeli goals of Palestinian displacement and reduces Gazan society to beggars

Humanitarian experts raise serious concerns about Washington’s proposed Gaza aid mechanism & how it entrenches Israel’s objectives of Palestinian displacement



Mohamed Solaimane
20 May, 2025
The New Arab

A US-supported system for delivering humanitarian aid to Gaza is expected to be implemented shortly, according to Washington’s envoy to Israel. The statement came on Friday, just days before US President Donald Trump visited the region. However, the envoy did not explain how the aid mechanism would function in the absence of a ceasefire or a de-escalation of hostilities.

Analysts and humanitarian experts are raising serious concerns about Washington’s newly proposed aid mechanism for Gaza, warning that it goes far beyond standard humanitarian frameworks and may, in fact, further entrench Israel’s strategic objective of displacing Palestinians.

The plan risks turning Gaza into a society sustained solely by emergency aid, with no means for recovery or sustainable living. They describe the initiative not as a neutral relief effort, but as a political instrument, closely mirroring, if not outright supporting, Israeli policy.

Meanwhile, the humanitarian situation in Gaza continues to deteriorate rapidly. The United Nations has warned that the territory is teetering on the brink of famine.

For months, Israel has maintained a tight blockade, severely limiting the entry of essential supplies. This comes as the Israeli government prepares to escalate its military operations against Hamas following the collapse of a ceasefire agreement in March.

The operational structure, which bypasses the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), is being seen as part of a broader campaign by both the US and Israel to dismantle the agency, which for decades has been central to humanitarian operations in Gaza.

While some observers believe the plan may be implemented, driven by the looming spectre of famine that leaves Palestinians with few alternatives, others anticipate serious obstacles.

These include a lack of funding, the high operational cost and complexity, and the likelihood of Israeli military interference. Critics also underscore the plan’s deviation from humanitarian norms, citing the absence of key protections and logistical safeguards.

The Trump administration announced in mid-May the creation of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a private new entity tasked with delivering humanitarian aid to the enclave.

Through its channels, aid will be delivered through private security firms operating under Israeli military protection, with distribution points established initially in the northern and southern regions of Gaza.

The plan, according to early details, centres on four aid distribution hubs. These hubs will initially provide food, clean water, and hygiene supplies to approximately 1.2 million people, covering just under 60 percent of the enclave’s population, but have the eventual goal of expanding the operation to reach the entire population of Gaza.

The sites themselves will be secured by private contractors and monitored by Israeli forces, with recipients subject to digital security screenings.

Palestinians, struggling with hunger due to the Israeli embargo, wait in line to receive hot meals distributed by the charity organisations as Israeli attacks continue [Getty]

A controversial development

Amjad Shawa, the director of the Palestinian NGO Network in Gaza, warns that the plan excludes the private sector from any recovery efforts and falls dramatically short of meeting the scale of Gaza’s needs.

"It offers only a fraction of what’s required in this catastrophe," he said, pointing to the lack of guarantees against arrest, violence, or inhumane treatment at distribution points.

Amjad describes the plan as effectively forcing displacement as it will drive people from the north to the south in search of food, effectively instituting “coerced population movement,” and it focuses only on food and hygiene, completely ignoring water, healthcare, shelter, and other essential services.

He adds that the aid mechanism does not just fail to alleviate the crisis, it risks institutionalising it.

“Rather than lifting the siege or stopping the war, it maintains and deepens the disaster while enhancing Israeli control over the humanitarian space,” Amjad tells The New Arab.

The most alarming aspect for many, however, is the plan’s deliberate exclusion of UNRWA.

"UNRWA has been the backbone of Gaza’s humanitarian infrastructure," Amjad continued. "This is a direct attempt to erase not only a vital service provider, but a symbol of the Palestinian refugee issue."

While Amjad welcomed the refusal of the United Nations and various NGOs to participate in the plan, he stressed that its success or failure ultimately hinges on international response.

“If the global community refuses to fund it, if it insists on upholding humanitarian norms, the plan can fail,” he said.

“Open the crossings for aid under the current system. Stop the war. Anything else will only perpetuate this catastrophe and deepen the suffering of Gaza’s people.”

Enabling displacement

Ismat Mansour, an expert on Israeli affairs, told The New Arab that the areas designated for aid “are entirely under Israeli military control,” adding that Palestinians receiving aid will be subjected to security screenings and Israeli-imposed conditions that effectively “weaponise assistance,” turning food into leverage.

“The plan is dangerous and destructive,” he said, alleging that part of its purpose is to provide humanitarian cover for further Israeli military operations, while easing global criticism over Israel’s role in exacerbating famine in Gaza.

“Displacement is a core goal of the Israeli governing coalition and one backed by figures like the United States president,” he said.

“While Trump may have stopped speaking openly about it, the strategy remains. Gathering Palestinians into designated zones under direct Israeli control only increases the likelihood of mass displacement.”

He also argued that because Israel, with American backing, dominates the situation on the ground, alternative voices or opposition to the plan may prove irrelevant.

“No one will say no to aid, regardless of the criticism. And no one has the power to stop this or prevent the displacement, which is the real goal,” he explained.

While far-right elements within the Israeli government, such as Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, publicly oppose the entry of humanitarian aid, Ismat said they overlook these concerns in favour of the plan’s broader benefits: increased control over Gaza and the strategic removal of its population.

“This is part of a calculated American effort to restructure Gaza through the weaponisation of aid,” political analyst Mohammad Diab said.

“The approach is aligned with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s vision for the territory.”

Unlike past initiatives, such as the floating aid dock off Gaza, which failed to materialise, Mohammad believes this plan is both serious and operational.

“A foundation has already been established, leadership appointed, and full coordination with Israel achieved. This isn’t just a symbolic gesture. It’s a sustained strategy,” he added.

He also noted that while some modifications to the mechanism might occur following dialogue with Arab states, the plan’s core features, which include strict aid management and the prevention of any assistance reaching Hamas, will remain intact.

“Even if changes are made, the structure won’t be compromised. The American administration is being pragmatic, but as famine intensifies, political considerations will fall away and the plan will become a de facto necessity for both the population and official actors,” he told The New Arab.

“Starvation,” he added, “is a tool. The US wants to reengineer Gaza politically, economically, and socially. Even if a temporary ceasefire is reached, aid will still be funnelled through Israel’s strict conditions under this American framework.”

For months, Israel has maintained a tight blockade, severely limiting the entry of essential supplies [Getty]

Unsustainable effort

However, political commentator Khalil Abu Shammala offered a sharply divergent view, predicting that the plan is likely to face significant implementation challenges.

He cited prohibitive costs, logistical complexity, and the probable refusal of international donors to finance an initiative that violates established humanitarian standards.

“This plan will require thousands of workers, massive logistical operations, and billions in funding. It’s not something a hastily formed foundation can manage,” Khalil said, warning that many governments and international organisations are “unwilling to engage with a system that incorporates security vetting and effectively segregates Palestinians into isolated zones under full Israeli control.”

Khalil further questioned the sustainability of the plan given the unpredictability of Israeli military policy.

“Israel can shut down crossings at any moment. That uncertainty makes long-term aid delivery untenable,” he said.

While acknowledging the alignment between the US aid mechanism and Israel’s strategic aims, including the use of food as leverage to facilitate displacement, Khalil expressed grave concern about the broader societal consequences.

“The plan reduces every segment of Gazan society to beggars wholly dependent on aid. It annihilates any hope of restoring Gaza’s civil, economic, and governmental institutions, from education and healthcare to reconstruction and social fabric,” he warned.

One of the clearest goals and likely outcomes of the plan, according to Khalil, is the displacement of Palestinians. He also questioned the sustainability of such an approach, asking how long people can “realistically survive on aid — what kind of future can be built under such conditions?"

He continued, “Is Gaza’s problem about securing food from donors? Of course not. What Gaza needs is an end to the war, an Israeli withdrawal, and the chance for its people to rebuild their lives with their own hands. They’ve done it before, and they can do it again if given the opportunity.”

Khalil contends that the real aim of the proposed aid plan is to concentrate Palestinians in isolated zones, paving the way for eventual mass displacement.

An aerial view shows the mass displacement of Palestinians who are now living in tents in the al-Mawasi area in Khan Yunis following intense Israeli attacks [Getty]

While the plan has been widely rejected by UN agencies, Palestinian factions, and official institutions, he expressed little optimism about their ability to block its implementation.

“None of these entities can stop it,” he said. “The mechanism already in place, relying on UN institutions and their local partners, is being sidelined.”

What could ultimately drive public acceptance of the plan, he feared, is not political endorsement but sheer desperation.

“Hunger is a brutal force,” he said. “It will push people to accept whatever is offered, however flawed. No organisation, no government, no faction can stand in the way of basic survival.

"That’s precisely the point of Israel’s deliberate policy of starvation, to reach a stage where the population is too desperate to resist.”

Mohamed Solaimane is a Gaza-based journalist with bylines in regional and international outlets, focusing on humanitarian and environmental issues

This piece is published in collaboration with Egab

‘Blueprint for Ethnic Cleansing’: NGOs condemn Gaza aid plan

International aid organizations are calling an Israeli-U.S. plan to bring humanitarian aid to Gaza a "politicized sham" and a "blueprint for ethnic cleansing." Meanwhile, the UN warns 14,000 babies could die within days if Gaza does not receive aid.

By Michael Arria 

May 20, 2025 2
MONDOWEISS

Palestinians clamor in line to receive a portion of food from a charity kitchen in Beit Lahia, northern Gaza, April 27, 2025. (Photo: Omar Ashtawy/APA Images)

A group of British human rights organizations is sounding the alarm on the Trump administration’s plan to bring humanitarian aid to Gaza.

Under the plan, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a U.S.-based organization, would handle the aid, and private military contractors would secure the distribution sites. The Israeli military would provide “necessary security.”

An open letter from 11 NGOs, including Action For Humanity and Christian Aid, refers to the plan as a “politicized sham” and a “blueprint for ethnic cleansing.”

“Despite branding itself as ‘independent’ and ‘transparent,’ the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation would be wholly dependent on Israeli coordination and operates via Israeli-controlled entry points, primarily the Port of Ashdod and the Kerem Shalom/Karem Abu Salem crossing,” the letter explains. “This entrenches and legitimises the very structures of control that are responsible for cutting Gaza off from food, fuel, and medicine.”

“Limiting aid distribution to restricted collection points would effectively exclude persons with disabilities and those who are injured and unable to move easily through the destruction and rubble, violating the principle of impartial needs-based humanitarian assistance,” it continues. “Let us be clear: the biggest barrier to humanitarian access in Gaza is not inefficiency or corruption, it is the deliberate restriction of aid by the Israeli government. The military siege on Gaza is a form of collective punishment. The restriction of aid is being used as a weapon of war.”

“Let us be clear: the biggest barrier to humanitarian access in Gaza is not inefficiency or corruption, it is the deliberate restriction of aid by the Israeli government. The military siege on Gaza is a form of collective punishment. The restriction of aid is being used as a weapon of war.”Letter from NGOs on the U.S.-Israel Gaza aid plan

The plan has also been condemned by the UN’s Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), which says the system “contradicts Israel’s obligations under International Humanitarian Law to allow and facilitate impartial humanitarian relief for civilians in need.”

“UN involvement would legitimize a military tactic that would have devastating consequences on the population and would damage the organization’s reputation in Gaza and the region,” reads a recent document from the group.

In recent remarks, U.S ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee admitted that the plan will only feed 60% of Gaza initially and blamed the deadly Israeli blockade on Hamas.

“You have to start somewhere and the somewhere feeds an enormous level of the people of Gaza,” said Huckabee.

The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is headed by Jake Wood, a U.S. military veteran who started the disaster relief nonprofit Team Rubicon in response to the Haiti earthquake in 2010.

“This plan is not perfect, but this plan will be feeding people by the end of the month, in a scenario where no one has allowed aid in over the course of the last 10 weeks,” said Wood in his first interview since starting the foundation.

“Ultimately, the community is going to face a choice. This is going to be the mechanism by which aid can be distributed in Gaza,” he continued. “Are you willing to participate? The answer is going to be, you know, pretty critical to whether or not this ramps up to sufficiently feed 2.2 million people in a very desperate situation.”

Wood has insisted that the plan would not lead to the further displacement of Palestinians, but the UN points out that it excludes northern Gaza, which could force people to relocate from the north.

Israeli leaders have also publicly admitted that the aid plan will enable them to continue their genocidal policies in the region.

In a video posted on social media, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu acknowledged the hunger crisis and said that images of famine would impair Israel’s ability to achieve its war aims.



“Our best friends in the world, senators that I know as enthusiastic Israel supporters, who I know for many years, are come to me and telling me, ‘we give you all the support for a final victory — arms, support on your maneuvers to destroy Hamas, support at the U.N. Security Council,” said Netanyahu. “There is one thing we cannot endure — pictures of mass famine. This is something we are unable to witness. We will not be able to support you.'”

In the same video, Netanyahu said that Israel would “take control of all the Gaza Strip” while delivering “minimal humanitarian aid: food and medicine only.”

These sentiments were echoed by Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, who held a press conference to assure his base that the aid plan was a means of continuing the genocide.

“The [aid] that will enter Gaza in the coming days is the tiniest amount,” he explained. A handful of bakeries that will hand out pita bread to people in public kitchens. People in Gaza will get a pita and a food plate, and that’s it. Exactly what we are seeing in the videos: people standing in line and waiting to have someone serve them, with some soup plate.”

“We are disassembling Gaza, and leaving it as piles of rubble, with total destruction [which has] no precedent globally,” he continued. And the world isn’t stopping us. There are pressures. There are those who attack [us]; they are trying to [make us] stop; they are not succeeding.”

NBC recently reported that the Trump administration is working on a plan to permanently relocate 1 million Palestinians from Gaza to Libya. Sources say the U.S. government would release billions in funds to Libya that were previously frozen in exchange for the country participating in the ethnic cleansing.

Hamas says they are unaware of any such plans.

“Palestinians are very rooted in their homeland, very strongly committed to the homeland and they are ready to fight up to the end and to sacrifice anything to defend their land, their homeland, their families, and the future of their children,” senior Hamas official Basem Naim told NBC. “[Palestinians] are exclusively the only party who have the right to decide for the Palestinians, including Gaza and Gazans, what to do and what not to do.”

This week, Israel cleared nine aid trucks to enter Gaza, marking the first delivery in three months. UN aid chief Tom Fletcher called it a “drop in the ocean,” as 500 trucks had been allowed in daily before the war.

The organization has warned that 14,000 babies could die within days if Gaza does not receive immediate, substantial aid.

“This is not food that Hamas is going to steal,” Fletcher told the BBC. “We run the risk of looting, of being hit by the Israeli offensive. We will be impeded, we will run huge risks, but I don’t see a better idea than getting that baby food in, to those moms, who at the moment cannot feed their own kids.”

Analysis

Weaponising hunger: The dystopian US-Israel aid plan for Gaza

The new aid plan bypasses the UN and uses private charities and security firms to deliver aid in Gaza, with fears it is a fig leaf to advance mass displacement

Alessandra Bajec
15 May, 2025

The New Arab

The US is establishing a new system relying on private firms to coordinate humanitarian aid deliveries to the Gaza Strip, as Israel’s total blockade continues for a third month and famine looms across the territory.

The aid mechanism, which will be managed by a newly created private charity, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), is aimed at delivering food and basic necessities as part of a broader US-Israeli effort to take control of aid distribution.

Satellite images reportedly show that a series of sites are being prepared by Israel as distribution centres, according to media reports.

Related

Israel starved Gaza before. But new blockade is ruthlessly total

Gaza siege

Alessandra Bajec

Under the new plan, announced by US ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee last Friday, the foundation will set up four distribution sites to provide food, water, hygiene kits, and medical supplies to 1.2 million people initially, which is around 60% of Gaza’s population.

Private American security contractors will be used to secure the delivery hubs, and Gazans would be forced to move south to receive aid in an area cordoned off by Israel's military.

Details of who would fund and run the programme, as well as how it would work on the ground, are not given, nor does the proposal provide a timeframe. Essential aid supplies are depleting quickly in Gaza under the unrelenting Israeli siege.

“The entire plan is a non-starter,” Ahmed Bayram, Middle East and North Africa regional media advisor for the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC), told The New Arab. “It sets a dangerous precedent, giving an occupier the power to engineer the aid system on its own terms and raising serious questions about the future of how we deliver aid.”

Humanitarian groups have squarely opposed the new aid system, which would replace the current one run by the United Nations and other international aid agencies. The UN slammed the scheme for sidestepping the existing distribution network, and for drastically reducing humanitarian access points from the 400 that operated across Gaza before Israel’s total blockade to just four.

“Israeli authorities already control the entry of aid into Gaza. Adding another layer of control only worsens delays, reduces vital supplies, and deepens the suffering of a population already trapped under siege,” Khalid Elsheikh, executive director of Doctors Without Borders (MSF) UAE, told TNA. He reiterated that a relief system must ensure free and equitable access to humanitarian supplies throughout the territory.

Aid experts warn this would strain the humanitarian system, making it nearly impossible to ensure equitable access to essential supplies for hundreds of thousands of people. They further noted that Palestinians have regularly come under attack from Israeli forces while collecting aid.

“A population being starved, forcibly displaced and bombed all at once and being told to line up for food in fenced-off zones run by private military contractors?” Bushra Khalidi, Palestinian Territory policy lead at Oxfam, questioned during a presser on Wednesday.

With a handful of aid sites under the Trump administration's proposed plan, displaced Palestinians could be forced to walk long distances carrying heavy food rations for their families.

Since early March, the Israeli blockade has cut off all relief to the Gaza Strip, pushing its inhabitants toward starvation amid basic supplies rapidly running out. [Getty]

“Using humanitarian aid as a tool to incentivise people to move from one place to another is completely unacceptable,” Jonathan Crickx, UNICEF’s chief of communications for Palestine, said in an interview with The New Arab, stressing that aid workers distribute relief to people in need “wherever they are”.

He emphasised that at least 1.9 million Palestinians so far have been displaced across the coastal strip as a result of Israeli bombardments, fighting, and conditions tied to security and food distribution.

“This mechanism appears practically unfeasible, incompatible with humanitarian principles and will create serious insecurity risks, all while failing to meet Israel’s obligations under international law,” the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs wrote last week in a document obtained by CNN.

UN agencies have urged Israel to end its over 10-week siege on Gaza and to allow unrestricted humanitarian access, calls that Tel Aviv has so far rejected.

Critics say the US initiative would also advance Israel's plans to coerce besieged Palestinians to move from north to south Gaza near the Egyptian border, and eventually out of the Strip, viewing it as complicity in forced displacement. The UN reports that 90% of the population has been displaced during the war, often multiple times.

The controversial proposal effectively calls for transferring control of Gaza’s aid distribution to a supply scheme largely based on plans discussed by Israel in recent weeks that would bypass international aid agencies and weaken the framework of international humanitarian law.

“How is it possible to provide the needed quantities for 2.1 million people?” Crickx asked. The humanitarian observed that the Israeli aid blueprint allows for only 60 trucks per day to enter Gaza, far fewer than the 650 trucks entering daily during the ceasefire, which he said was already “barely sufficient” to meet basic needs.

Since early March, the Israeli blockade has cut off all relief to the Gaza Strip, pushing its inhabitants toward starvation amid basic supplies rapidly running out, collapsing supply chains, a near-total power blackout, severe water shortages, and a devastated healthcare system. The Palestinian Authority formally declared Gaza a famine zone last week.

Returning from his last field trip to Gaza a couple of days ago, UNICEF’s State of Palestine communications lead described the situation as “absolutely catastrophic” and was adamant that the enclave’s 1.1 million children risk dying from malnutrition if the full siege persists.

“The Israeli occupation forces are targeting every aspect of the health system across Gaza and any survival capacity for our people’s bodies,” Dr Mohammed Salha, Director of Al Awda hospital in North Gaza, said in a statement shared with NGOs.

The main relief organisations working in the Palestinian territory have refused to cooperate with the Israeli plan, enforcing a military-controlled delivery system which, they said, would weaponise aid and could worsen civilian suffering.

Although Israel has repeatedly accused Hamas of diverting and profiting from relief deliveries to Gaza, aid groups maintain that the vast majority of food aid reaches civilians in need and, instead, consider Israel’s complete ban on humanitarian assistance the primary cause of the hunger crisis in the enclave.

Aid officials explicitly said they could not participate in the US-Israeli scheme, fearing it violates “fundamental humanitarian principles” and breaches international law.

"It forces further displacement. It exposes thousands of people to harm," UN humanitarian chief Tom Fletcher told the Security Council. "It restricts aid to only one part of Gaza while leaving other dire needs unmet. It makes aid conditional on political and military aims. It makes starvation a bargaining chip."

“The UN cannot join any effort that does not meet our principles for the distribution of humanitarian aid, including humanity, impartiality, independence and neutrality,” UN deputy spokesperson Farhan Haq said.

Russia, China, and the UK have also rejected the US-Israeli plan for aid in Gaza, pressing Israel to lift its blockade of the territory.

This is not the first attempt by the two countries to circumvent the UN’s aid system in Gaza. In February 2024, after blocking relief to Gaza City and the north for more than a month, Israel delivered flour via private contractors. When crowds gathered to receive aid, Israeli forces reportedly opened fire, sparking a deadly stampede.

At least 110 people were killed and hundreds injured in what became known as the “flour massacre”. The following month, former US president Joe Biden announced a $230 million floating pier to bring aid into the Strip. It operated for only 20 days, delivering just one day’s worth of pre-war food supplies.

Critics say the aid plan would advance Israel's objective of coercing Palestinians to move from north to south Gaza near the Egyptian border, eventually displacing them from the coastal enclave. [Getty]

Bayram talked about the risks associated with the infamous relief initiative, pointing out that it empowers a conflicting party “to decide who gets aid” based on political or even military considerations. It also facilitates forcible population transfers, he continued, by pushing civilians to travel to distant points set by an occupying power in order to receive humanitarian assistance.

“Aid has always been politicised in Gaza. Now, it’s been militarised and turned into a tool of control,” the NRC’s communications advisor said, warning how damaging it would be for the humanitarian community to take any part in such a problematic delivery mechanism.

MSF UAE’s director was adamant that any aid system must be independent, neutral, and transparent to ensure critical relief to beneficiaries, as required under international law.

“Any attempt to direct, delay, or distribute aid in a discriminatory manner is against the values of humanitarian assistance,” Elsheikh asserted.


Alessandra Bajec is a freelance journalist currently based in Tunis
Follow her on Twitter: @AlessandraBajec