Gaza Aid Crisis: 5 Shocking Truths Behind Controversial New Plan Backed by U.S. and Israel

A controversial U.S.-backed initiative, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), aims to bypass aid blockades by launching a tightly controlled food distribution system in Gaza, approved by Israel and the U.S. to counter alleged Hamas interference. Despite urgent famine conditions, UN agencies refuse to participate, calling the plan a distraction that risks legitimizing displacement of Palestinians and heightening security risks for civilians.

The GHF plans to deliver 300 million meals in 90 days through southern and central Gaza sites initially, with northern areas—home to over a million displaced people—delayed, fueling concerns over Israel’s push to depopulate the region. The foundation will rely on armed U.S. contractors for aid security, a move critics warn could compromise humanitarian neutrality. While GHF director Jake Wood denies sharing biometric data or enabling forced displacement, mistrust persists due to Israel’s prolonged aid restrictions and attacks on aid workers.

The UN emphasizes existing frameworks could work if access were granted, dismissing claims of systemic aid theft as unproven. With Gaza’s hunger crisis worsening rapidly, the standoff highlights the politicization of aid as 2.2 million Palestinians face unprecedented starvation. Success hinges on overcoming logistical gaps, uniting fractured efforts, and prioritizing survival over geopolitical agendas.

Gaza Aid Crisis: 5 Shocking Truths Behind Controversial New Plan Backed by U.S. and Israel

Amid escalating hunger in Gaza, a newly formed aid organization, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), has announced plans to launch a U.S.- and Israeli-approved aid delivery system by the end of May. The move comes after Israel blocked most aid for nearly three months, citing concerns over Hamas diverting supplies—a claim humanitarian groups and Hamas deny. With 2.2 million Palestinians facing catastrophic food shortages, the GHF’s proposal has ignited a heated debate over efficacy, neutrality, and unintended consequences. 

The Plan: Speed vs. Skepticism 

Jake Wood, a U.S. Marine Corps veteran and GHF’s executive director, told CNN the foundation aims to deliver 300 million meals within its first 90 days through tightly controlled distribution points in southern and central Gaza, with eventual expansion north. Israel has reportedly agreed to permit limited aid shipments ahead of the mechanism’s formal launch, though specifics remain unclear.  

Wood emphasized urgency: “This plan will feed people by month’s end in a situation where no aid has flowed freely for 10 weeks.” However, the United Nations and major aid agencies have refused participation, calling the plan a risky distraction. UN Aid Chief Tom Fletcher urged focus on existing frameworks, stating, “Let’s not waste time: We already have a plan.” 

Controversies and Concerns 

Critics argue the GHF’s model could inadvertently support Israel’s alleged goal of displacing Gazans from the north. While Wood denies this, the initial exclusion of northern distribution sites—home to over 1 million people—raises red flags. Israel’s Defense Minister recently vowed to keep northern Gaza “empty,” fueling suspicions. Wood countered that two northern sites could open within 30 days but provided no guarantees.  

Another flashpoint involves security. The GHF will employ UG Solutions, a U.S. private security firm, to escort aid trucks—a departure from traditional UN-led efforts. Wood stressed contractors will not interact with civilians and operate under strict rules of engagement, though details remain undisclosed. Skeptics warn armed escorts could blur humanitarian neutrality and escalate risks for civilians. 

Misinformation and Mistrust 

Wood accused critics of relying on “misinformation,” including claims that Israel would receive biometric data from aid recipients or directly secure sites. “I would not participate in such a plan,” he asserted. However, trust gaps persist. Aid groups cite Israel’s repeated denials of aid access and attacks on humanitarian workers—over 250 killed since October—as reasons for caution.  

The UN notes no evidence of systemic aid diversion in Gaza, calling Israel’s restrictions a “man-made famine.” Wood sidestepped the dispute: “It doesn’t matter if Hamas steals 1% or 50% of aid. Israel controls access, so we work within their framework.”  

The Road Ahead 

Without UN support, the GHF faces steep hurdles. Current plans cover just 60% of Gaza’s population initially, leaving gaps in critical areas. Wood urged aid groups to “choose whether to participate,” but time is scarce. The World Food Programme warns Gaza’s food crisis could surpass any since WWII, with 70% facing “catastrophic hunger.”  

Meanwhile, geopolitical tensions simmer. The U.S. backs the GHF as part of broader efforts to pressure Israel on aid, while critics view the plan as legitimizing Israel’s blockade. For Gazans, the debate is secondary to survival. As one Rafah resident recently told Reuters, “We’re not living—we’re chasing crumbs.”  

The Bigger Picture 

The GHF’s launch underscores the chaos of delivering aid in active conflict zones, where politics often override urgency. While innovative solutions are needed, the exclusion of established agencies risks fragmentation. As Wood concedes, “This isn’t perfect, but it’s a start.” Whether it’s enough to avert mass starvation—or deepens Gaza’s crisis—remains uncertain.