Israel has decided to halt the entry of food and goods into the Gaza Strip, reviving a tactic similar to the siege once imposed at the war’s inception with Hamas. This decision has garnered significant backlash from the United Nations and various humanitarian organizations, which denounce it as a breach of international law.
Saudi Arabia’s foreign ministry described the move as “a tool of extortion,” while Oxfam labeled it “a reckless act of collective punishment.” Additionally, Egypt, which often acts as a key mediator, criticized the strategy, accusing Israel of employing “starvation as a weapon.”
Throughout the conflict, hunger and food security have been persistent issues for the over two million residents of Gaza. Aid specialists had previously cautioned about the risk of famine during prolonged hostilities. Present concerns center on the potential loss of progress achieved during the recent six-week ceasefire.
In an attempt to pressure Hamas into agreeing with what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government calls a US-backed proposal, Israel aims to extend the current ceasefire’s first phase. This proposal is favored over entering the more challenging second phase, which involves negotiations on Hamas releasing hostages in exchange for an Israeli withdrawal and a permanent ceasefire.
The first phase of the ceasefire concluded early on a Sunday, only for Israel to swiftly endorse a new plan to prolong this phase into mid-April around the Jewish holiday of Passover. This plan, attributed to US Mideast envoy Steve Witkoff, also includes a threat from Israel to potentially restart the conflict if negotiations prove unsatisfactory.
Initially set to be discussed a month ago, negotiations on the second phase remain uncertain, as Hamas has remained insistent on initiating these talks. Soon after endorsing a plan to extend the ceasefire, Israel declared an immediate halt to aid into Gaza.
The US response remains unclear, as no official statement has been released regarding Israel’s announcement. There is no information about when Steve Witkoff might return to the Middle East, despite expectations of a visit in the previous week under the Biden administration.
The US administration had previously urged Israel to allow an influx of aid into Gaza, threatening to curb weaponry support if necessary. Moreover, aid groups have repeatedly criticized the Israeli-imposed restrictions which had occasionally resulted in hundreds of aid trucks waiting at the border for entry approval.
Israel maintains it has permitted adequate aid, attributing shortages to alleged U.N. distribution failures and accusations that Hamas has been diverting supplies.
Prior to the ceasefire, Palestinians often experienced food shortages, resorting to meal reductions, scavenging, and foraging due to the dearth of resources. During the ceasefire’s first phase initiated on January 19, aid into Gaza saw a notable increase, with an average of 600 trucks entering daily.
This influx aimed to continue through all three phases of the ceasefire. However, Hamas argues that less than half of the agreed fuel deliveries — vital for generators and other functions — were approved. The organization also contends that essential inputs for food security, like live animals and animal feed, were denied.
Despite these hindrances, Gaza’s residents managed to amass some supplies. According to the Norwegian Refugee Council, although the ceasefire provided some relief to Gaza, it was insufficient to meet the overwhelming humanitarian requirements.
Israel’s announcement came shortly after the first evening meal of Ramadan in Gaza, a time marked by community feasting amid the ruins left by the war. The decision prompted a rush at the markets, sharply driving up prices. Mahmoud Shalabi from the Medical Aid for Palestinians commented that prices in Gaza “tripled immediately.”
The aid cutoff has been met with immediate legal challenges. Several organizations have filed for an interim order from Israel’s Supreme Court to forbid the prevention of aid entry, arguing it breaches international obligations and amounts to a war crime.
Last year, the International Criminal Court (ICC) indicated that there may be grounds to suspect Israel of using “starvation as a method of warfare” which led to an ICC arrest warrant for Netanyahu. This accusation is pivotal to South Africa’s legal proceedings at the International Court of Justice, alleging genocide against Israel.
Kenneth Roth, formerly with Human Rights Watch, asserted that Israel, as an occupying force, has an “absolute duty” under the Geneva Conventions to facilitate humanitarian aid, critiquing the recent decision as a continuation of a “war-crime starvation strategy.”
