U.S.-Backed Aid Efforts in Gaza Face Escalating Challenges Amid Controversy and Violence.
The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a U.S.- and Israeli-backed organization registered in Delaware in February 2025, has emerged as a contentious player in Gaza’s humanitarian crisis. Launched to distribute aid amid Israel’s 11-week blockade from March to May 2025, the GHF has faced criticism for its lack of transparency, alleged politicization of aid, and involvement in deadly incidents at its distribution sites. This analysis explores the GHF’s registration, operations, funding, leadership, and controversies, drawing on a BBC investigation, public records, and other sources to address the questions surrounding this enigmatic entity.
Registration and Origins
The GHF was incorporated in Delaware on February 28, 2025, two weeks after President Donald Trump’s inauguration, under the name “Global Humanitarian Fund,” later changed to “Gaza Humanitarian Foundation.” Its registered address in Dover, Delaware, is a red-brick building used by an agent for incorporating firms, a common practice in Delaware due to the state’s lenient transparency laws. A BBC visit to the site found no physical GHF presence, highlighting the organization’s elusive nature. A contingency filing in Geneva, Switzerland, was also established but is being wound down after Swiss authorities flagged noncompliance with legal obligations for foundations registered there.
The GHF’s origins trace back to Israeli and U.S. efforts to bypass traditional aid channels, particularly the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which Israel accuses of enabling Hamas to divert aid. A New York Times report revealed that the GHF concept was developed by Israeli businessmen and reservists, including Michael Ehrlich and Yotam Cohen, with ties to the Israeli government. The plan was formalized in coordination with U.S. security contractors, notably Safe Reach Solutions (SRS), led by CIA veteran Philip Reilly, to secure aid distribution sites. The GHF’s registration in Delaware, a hub for corporate anonymity, has fueled suspicions about its motives and backers.
Operations: A Militarized Aid Model
The GHF began operations on May 26, 2025, following the partial lifting of Israel’s blockade, which had pushed Gaza’s 2.3 million residents toward famine. The “Humanitarian Aid Distribution Program in the Gaza Strip” operates four distribution hubs—three near the Tel al-Sultan refugee camp in Rafah and one in the Netzarim Corridor—secured by U.S.-based armed contractors and monitored by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) at a distance. Unlike the UN’s 400 distribution points, which delivered aid directly to communities, the GHF’s centralized model requires Palestinians to travel through militarized zones to collect food parcels, often facing gunfire.
The GHF claims to have distributed 8,000 food boxes by May 27, feeding 44,000 people (about 2% of Gaza’s population), with plans to reach 1.2 million. However, the hubs’ limited capacity—each designed to serve 300,000 people—and their southern focus have been criticized for neglecting northern Gaza and exacerbating displacement. The food parcels provide 1,750 calories per day, below the UN’s 2,100-calorie emergency standard, and exclude medical, water, and shelter needs. The IDF’s presence and biometric screening of recipients, intended to exclude Hamas affiliates, have raised concerns about neutrality and safety.
Deadly incidents have marred operations. Since May 27, over 300 Palestinians have been killed and 2,600 injured near GHF sites, per the Gaza Health Ministry, with 22 deaths reported on June 20, 2025, at Al-Alam in Rafah. Witnesses describe Israeli forces firing on crowds, often with lethal precision, while the IDF claims it uses warning shots or targets “suspects.” A June 12 incident saw Hamas allegedly attack a GHF bus, killing eight workers, though Hamas claimed the victims were part of an Israeli-backed militia. The GHF has suspended operations multiple times due to violence and overcrowding, with access roads declared “combat zones” by the IDF.
Funding: A Veil of Secrecy
The GHF’s funding remains opaque, a critical issue for a humanitarian organization. A senior Israeli official claimed the GHF secured $100 million from anonymous foreign governments and private donors to launch operations. Israel’s public broadcaster Kan reported a secret $200 million appropriation from the Israeli Defense Ministry, though the Prime Minister’s office denied using taxpayer funds. Udi Levy, a former Mossad official, alleged Qatar and Turkey as funders, but no evidence substantiates this. The GHF’s executive chairman, Johnnie Moore, told NBC News the group is not funded by Israel, but he provided no details on sources.
The U.S. State Department is considering a $500 million allocation from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which would make the U.S. the GHF’s largest donor. This proposal, reported by Axios and Reuters, faces resistance from some U.S. officials wary of the GHF’s role in mass casualty incidents and its lack of coordination with established NGOs. The Boston Consulting Group (BCG), which helped create the GHF, invoiced over $1 million monthly before terminating its contract in June 2025, citing pro bono work. The GHF’s refusal to disclose funding has drawn scrutiny from UNRWA’s Bill Deere, who contrasts it with UN agencies’ transparent financial tracking.
Leadership and Resignations
The GHF’s leadership has been unstable. Jake Wood, a former U.S. Marine and Team Rubicon co-founder, was executive director until his resignation on May 25, 2025, citing the project’s violation of humanitarian principles—humanity, neutrality, impartiality, and independence. Wood’s exit, followed by a second unnamed official’s resignation, signaled internal dissent. A leaked 14-page document listed Nate Mook (former World Central Kitchen CEO) and David Beasley (former World Food Programme chief) as potential board members, but both denied involvement. A retired U.S. lieutenant-general was also mentioned but unconfirmed.
John Acree, a former USAID official, served as interim director, succeeded by Reverend Dr. Johnnie Moore, an evangelical leader and Trump adviser, as executive chairman on June 3, 2025. Moore’s appointment raised concerns due to his support for Trump’s controversial February 2025 proposal to depopulate Gaza for real estate development. Loik Henderson, listed as president in Delaware records, is a lawyer with corporate experience but has not responded to inquiries. The GHF’s Swiss branch listed David Papazian, Lolk Samuel Marcel Henderson, and David Kohler as leaders, but Kohler was removed, and the Swiss operation is dissolving.
Controversies and Criticisms
The GHF has faced widespread condemnation for politicizing aid and enabling Israeli objectives. Key controversies include:
- Violation of Humanitarian Principles: The UN, ICRC, and 11 NGOs, including MSF, reject the GHF for compromising neutrality, impartiality, and independence. Its coordination with the IDF and use of armed contractors militarize aid, while biometric screening raises privacy and coercion concerns. UNRWA’s Bill Deere and UN humanitarian chief Jonathan Whittall call it “engineered scarcity” designed to control populations.
- Forced Displacement: Critics, including TRIAL International, argue the GHF’s southern hubs facilitate Israel’s alleged plan to depopulate northern Gaza, a potential war crime. The perilous journeys to sites, coupled with violence, deter aid access, pushing civilians south. James Smith, a doctor in Gaza, described the hubs as “inhumane,” likening them to cages.
- Deadly Incidents: The Gaza Health Ministry reports over 300 deaths at GHF sites, with survivors calling them “death traps.” The IDF’s inconsistent accounts—claiming warning shots or Hamas sabotage—contrast with eyewitness reports of targeted gunfire. The GHF’s denials of casualties, such as after a May 27 incident, undermine credibility.
- Lack of Transparency: The GHF’s refusal to disclose funding, board members, or operational details has drawn scrutiny. Its Delaware registration and dissolving Swiss branch suggest efforts to evade oversight. TRIAL International’s probe into the Swiss GHF’s compliance with humanitarian law highlights legal risks.
- Ineffectiveness: The GHF’s four hubs cannot meet Gaza’s needs, covering only 2% of the population initially and neglecting non-food aid. UN agencies, capable of delivering 500 trucks daily, are sidelined, exacerbating famine risks. The Hamas-run Interior Ministry warned Palestinians against engaging with the GHF, citing collaboration risks.
U.S. and Israeli Perspectives
The Trump administration champions the GHF as a solution to prevent Hamas from profiting off aid, a claim Israel supports but lacks evidence for, per Western officials. U.S. Ambassador Mike Huckabee noted IDF troops would secure hubs “at a distance,” reinforcing Israeli oversight. The Biden administration, conversely, argued aid diversion was minimal and did not justify blockades. Israel’s blockade, resumed in March 2025 to pressure Hamas over hostages, was condemned globally, leading to the GHF’s creation as an alternative to UNRWA, which Israel banned from operating in its territory.
Posts on X reflect polarized sentiments. Pro-Israel users like @HenMazzig and @Osint613 praise the GHF for bypassing Hamas, citing alleged threats and attacks by the group. Critics like @MiddleEastEye and @DropSiteNews highlight the GHF’s opacity and role in violence, noting its absence at its Delaware address. The U.S. State Department, per spokesperson Tammy Bruce, has distanced itself, redirecting inquiries to the GHF, indicating unease with its chaotic rollout.
Implications and Future Outlook
The GHF’s operations have deepened Gaza’s crisis, with violence at sites deterring aid access and famine looming. Its militarized model and lack of transparency undermine humanitarian principles, risking complicity in war crimes like forced displacement. The UN and NGOs demand a return to their 400-point distribution system, requiring Israel to reopen crossings and ensure safe access. The GHF’s reliance on U.S. funding, if approved, would entangle the U.S. further in a controversial operation, potentially escalating tensions with allies opposing the model.
For Palestinians, the GHF represents a deadly gamble, as desperation drives thousands to risk gunfire for inadequate aid. Israel’s strategy to weaken Hamas through aid control has instead fueled chaos, with no resolution to the hostage crisis or ceasefire in sight. The GHF’s future hinges on its ability to scale operations, address violence, and gain legitimacy, but its current trajectory suggests a flawed experiment exacerbating Gaza’s suffering.
Disclaimer: This analysis is based on publicly available information and is intended for informational purposes only. It reflects reported events and perspectives but does not endorse any narrative or predict outcomes with certainty.
Source: BBC, Reuters, The Washington Post, Gaza Health Ministry, UN statements, June 2025.
