Bulging eyes, visible ribcages and children’s cries from hunger are no longer rare sights and sounds in Gaza; they are the norm. But this famine is not caused by a lack of food; it is caused by politics, blockade and the deliberate obstruction of access.
While airdropped aid may offer limited relief to Gaza’s starving civilians, it also serves a broader political purpose. For western governments – many of which have staunchly supported Israel throughout the conflict – such symbolic gestures help deflect mounting criticism.
By backing airdrops, they can project humanitarian concern while distancing themselves from the uncomfortable reality that their allies’ policies have played a central role in creating the conditions for mass starvation.
At the same time, the method allows Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to frame the aid as a concession to international pressure, rather than as an operation facilitated or permitted by Israel itself.
For months, Netanyahu has aligned himself with the hardline vision of far-right members of his cabinet – both to preserve his governing coalition and out of personal conviction.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on
Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
That conviction has been reflected in his party’s electoral alignment with Jewish Power, an ultranationalist faction that traces its roots to the banned Kahanist movement, under the banner of the “Union of Right-Wing Parties”.
Western governments have been reluctant to use their influence to urge Israel to end its military campaign in Gaza, even as the reported death toll has climbed above 60,000, including more than 16,000 children. The toll is no longer limited to those killed in air strikes or combat; growing numbers of civilians are now believed to be dying from hunger, as food and humanitarian aid remain scarce on the ground.
Failure to reach consensus
The European Union (EU) failed to reach a consensus on taking action against Israel over the continued obstruction of aid deliveries to Gaza, including potential trade-related measures.
EU foreign affairs commissioner Kaja Kallas later announced that, following diplomatic engagement, Israel had agreed to implement steps to facilitate increased aid distribution. However, despite the announcement, humanitarian access has remained critically constrained, with little sign of progress in alleviating the crisis.
The scarcity of food and humanitarian aid in Gaza is not due to logistical challenges, but is widely attributed by human rights groups and aid officials to deliberate policy choices.
The fact that these convoys remain blocked while aircraft drop aid from the sky reveals a grim contradiction: the tools to avert famine exist, but the political will to use them does not
An Israeli military whistleblower has revealed that Israeli forces deliberately destroyed or set ablaze approximately 1,000 aid trucks carrying food and medical supplies. In separate incidents, Israeli civilians were seen obstructing aid convoys and vandalising shipments intended for the besieged enclave.
These actions have been reinforced by public statements from senior Israeli officials. In the early days of the war, former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant declared a “complete siege” on Gaza, stating that “there will be no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel”.
Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, a prominent figure in the far-right coalition, was quoted as saying that while starving Gaza’s civilian population until hostages are released “may be just and moral”, the international community “would not allow it”.
In 2025, Defence Minister Israel Katz described humanitarian restrictions as a legitimate tool of pressure, while National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir publicly denied reports of widespread hunger.
Under mounting international pressure, the Israeli government agreed to expand humanitarian access. During a visit to the UK in July 2025, US President Donald Trump, standing alongside Netanyahu, remarked that “those children look very hungry” – a rare expression of concern amid growing global outrage.
However, rather than opening land crossings through Israel or Egypt, western allies backed an airdrop campaign – now led by Jordan and the United Arab Emirates.
This method has proven both dangerous and inadequate. Falling pallets have injured civilians on the ground, and each aircraft typically delivers the equivalent of just one truckload – far below the estimated 500 truckloads needed daily to meet Gaza’s basic humanitarian needs.
According to Unrwa Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini, more than 6,000 aid trucks are currently waiting for clearance in Egypt and Jordan. The fact that these convoys remain blocked while aircraft drop aid from the sky reveals a grim contradiction: the tools to avert famine exist, but the political will to use them does not.
This impasse has been justified by US and Israeli claims that Hamas is looting humanitarian supplies. In response, the two governments backed the creation of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) – a new body registered in Delaware.
Presented as a more secure and accountable alternative, the GHF marked a departure from long-standing partnerships with established agencies such as Unrwa and the World Food Programme (WFP).
Growing criticism
But the GHF’s operations have drawn growing criticism – not only for bypassing established humanitarian channels, but for their deadly consequences on the ground.
Nearly 900 Palestinians have been killed in recent weeks while attempting to access food aid, most of them near distribution points operated by the foundation, according to the United Nations (UN).
The UN human rights office warned that these deaths raise serious concerns about the safety and effectiveness of the GHF’s delivery model, which has been heavily backed by the US and Israel.
Gaza Humanitarian Foundation: Israel’s new model for weaponised aid
Read More »
At the same time, the rationale behind the foundation’s creation is coming under increasing scrutiny. A recent USAID assessment, along with statements by Israeli officials, has cast doubt on the scale and credibility of the alleged aid diversion by Hamas.
No conclusive evidence has emerged to support claims that the group is systematically looting humanitarian supplies in a way that would justify sidelining established international organisations. Experts now warn that relying on newly formed political entities like the GHF risks undermining two essential principles of effective humanitarian response: efficiency and neutrality.
Symbolic gestures cannot be a substitute for genuine relief. The most effective path forward lies not in improvised alternatives, but in restoring access for experienced humanitarian organisations with the infrastructure and legitimacy to operate at scale.
Agencies like Unrwa and the WFP have spent decades delivering aid in conflict zones. Allowing them to function freely remains the surest way to stem Gaza’s humanitarian catastrophe and to move beyond performative responses towards real accountability and life-saving action.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
