Boston Consulting Group CEO apologizes for Israel-backed Gaza aid project

[cliffside]

Source: WP

Full article at link

".... The apology letter is the latest fallout from the decision by Israel and the United States to bypass the U.N. and channel the delivery of essential aid through the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), an opaque entity that has limited aid delivery to a few distribution hubs overseen by U.S. private security contractors in coordination with the Israel Defense Forces.

GHF came under immediate criticism from the U.N. and aid groups, who expressed concerns about the independence of the program. Hours before the group began operations, the foundation’s executive director, Jake Wood, resigned, saying that its plans were inconsistent with “humanitarian principles.”

.... Most humanitarian groups backed out of the project because of their concerns about Israeli oversight and the militarization of aid. Others have rejected the new system based on practical assessments that GHF cannot operate at the scale required to address Gaza’s hunger crisis, where more than 2 million people are at risk of starvation after Israel barred the entry of food, water and humanitarian aid for nearly three months.

.... In response to previous Post reporting, which detailed early fears that the residential compounds might be compared to “‘concentration camps’ with biometrics,” a spokesperson for GHF denied allegations that Gazans would be vetted in order to access aid, and dismissed the planning documents as inaccurate and out of date...."



Read more: https://wapo.st/4jHnJkt

[cliffside]

1. Link to article within the above link - full article below

https://wapo.st/3FIw21r

Sweeping overhaul of Gaza aid raises questions of morality and workability

".... In previously unreported internal documents, the group detailed a radically new and ambitious model: It envisioned the creation of an organization called the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) that would hire armed private contractors to provide logistics and security for a handful of aid distribution hubs to be built in southern Gaza. Under the arrangement, which would replace existing aid distribution networks coordinated by the United Nations, Palestinian civilians would have to travel to the hubs and submit to identity checks to receive rations from nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Eventually, according to the plan, Palestinians would live in guarded compounds that would each house up to tens of thousands of noncombatants.

But as early as November, the documents showed, the planners anticipated that the foundation could face potentially damaging questions from the public about its opaque origins, qualifications and moral legitimacy. Those concerns about possible pushback now appear prescient, with prominent humanitarian agencies and prospective donors balking, some senior officers in the Israeli military questioning the plan — and even some people who participated in the foundation’s early planning distancing themselves from the project, citing moral qualms over the possibility that it would enable the forced displacement of Palestinians or misuse biometrics.

The GHF’s Gaza aid operation is expected to launch this coming week. Whether it succeeds — and how it operates — holds tremendous implications for the 2 million Palestinians who are sealed in the 140-square-mile enclave and nearing the brink of famine, according to U.N. estimates. Since March 2, Israel has barred nearly all food and medical supplies from entering Gaza, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s security cabinet voted May 4 to only allow aid distribution to resume under a model resembling the GHF. But the foundation has struggled to sign on established humanitarian aid groups or major donors, with the United Nations and many aid groups saying they cannot cooperate with a model that violates their principles prohibiting the vetting of aid recipients and may not adequately feed all of Gaza.

.... Five people engaged in the planning process that produced the GHF recalled in interviews that they initially agreed it was important to develop a model for aid delivery in Gaza that Israel would support but eventually developed ethical reservations. In each case, these people said they felt uneasy about a militarized model that deployed private security forces and vetted aid recipients with biometric technology and possibly facial recognition. They also felt that the plan to build only four distribution sites in southern Gaza would require civilians to travel hours to reach them or even facilitate the Israeli military’s campaign to drive Gaza’s population southward — a tactic that could amount to forced displacement, a war crime...."