Controversy over allegations that a dozen staff members participated in the Hamas assault on Israel last Oct. 7 has roiled the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).
Countries including the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Canada have suspended funding to UNRWA, the principal organization providing urgently needed aid to between 2.5 and 3 million Palestinian refugees. Most are in the Gaza Strip, which has been under Israeli attack since Oct. 7. Nearly 30,000 people have died and a quarter of the population faces the threat of death from starvation.
UNRWA quickly fired those alleged to have been involved in the Hamas assault on Israel and started an investigation. Philippe Lazzarini, the agency’s Commissioner General, said that “any UNRWA employee who was involved in acts of terror will be held accountable, including through criminal prosecution.”
The agency now faces significant financial difficulties. UNRWA has warned that it will be difficult to provide essential services, including education, health care, and emergency relief beyond February 2024, potentially leading to a catastrophic humanitarian crisis, particularly among the over 1.5 million people forced to leave their homes in Gaza since Israel began strikes on the enclave.
UNRWA was established in 1949 to give assistance and protection to hundreds of thousands of Palestinians displaced during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. Over the years, its mandate has evolved to serve the children and grandchildren of those refugees by providing education, health care, and social services. Of 5.9 million registered refugees, 1.78 million are registered in Gaza, 1.13 million in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, 2.56 million in Jordan, 679,000 in Syria, and 564,000 in Lebanon. About 1.5 million refugees live in 58 recognized camps.
UNRWA employs about 30,000 staff members, making it one of the largest UN programs in the Middle East. The majority of employees work in the field and many of them are descended from refugees.
Israel has treated the organization with suspicion and has long maintained that UNRWA poses a national security threat. Even before Oct. 7, Israel accused the agency of allowing its facilities and resources to be used by Palestinian militant groups such as Hamas. These allegations include claims that UNRWA schools have been used to store weapons and that militants have launched attacks on Israel from agency facilities.
Some claims have been substantiated in a few cases. During the 2014 Gaza war, for example, UNRWA itself reported discovering Hamas rockets in several vacant schools. UNRWA condemned the violations and removed the weapons. Another area of criticism focuses on the content of educational materials used in UNRWA schools, which Israel alleges foster anti-Israel sentiment. However, a comprehensive assessment in 2020 by a UNRWA oversight body found that agency textbooks largely adhered to UN values, such as neutrality, human rights, tolerance, and non-discrimination.
Critics have accused UNRWA of not doing enough to prevent members of militant groups from being involved in its programs. The vetting process is complicated by the fact that the agency operates in a highly politicized and conflict-prone environment. Checking every individual’s background is a massive undertaking that UNRWA financial constraints make difficult to achieve.
Not surprisingly, the political opinions of UNRWA staff, most of whom are teachers, tend to align with the refugees they serve, especially on issues such as resettlement and the right of refugees to return to historic Palestine. Some staff members may support violence to achieve these goals. Given that most staff, too, are refugees often living in camps, they may be reluctant to report rule violations due to fear of retribution from armed groups. It is important to distinguish, however, between individual views and the agency’s overarching humanitarian mandate. Conflating a UNRWA employee’s perspectives with the agency’s mission undermines the critical services the body provides under challenging circumstances.
Even if the allegations of direct involvement by a dozen staff on Oct. 7 are correct, Israel’s denunciation of UNRWA appears to be part of a broader strategic objective to shift the narrative around the Palestinian issue, diminishing international support for refugees to return to or be compensated for the homes they lost in 1948 or 1967. Israel sees UNRWA as perpetuating the problem and an obstacle to integrating the refugees into host countries, particularly Lebanon and Jordan.
The accusations against UNRWA emerged as the International Court of Justice gave a preliminary response to South African charges that Israel was committing acts of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. While it stopped short of calling for an immediate ceasefire, the ICJ condemned Israel’s actions and called for Israel to submit a report detailing steps to curtail civilian deaths. Former UNRWA administrator Lex Takkenberg suggested that Israel’s allegations were an attempt to undermine the ICJ ruling and deflect global scrutiny from Israel’s military assault on Gaza, which has drawn widespread condemnation from human rights groups and international communities.
However, the consequences of withdrawing support for UNRWA could be worse than allowing it to continue its work. It could cause heightened instability in the Middle East and fuel more Palestinian unrest and radicalization. This could have spillover effects in neighboring countries that host significant numbers of Palestinian refugees.
Many in the Arab world and Global South also perceive a double standard in the European and American response to the Gaza war compared to Western outrage over civilian casualties in other conflicts, such as Ukraine.
Following the 2014 Hamas-Israel war in Gaza, the UN established a board of inquiry to investigate incidents involving UN premises affected by Israeli military operations. The board found that several UNRWA schools and shelters were hit by Israeli airstrikes during the conflict. The report concluded that in some cases, there was evidence suggesting negligence by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) or disregard for the safety of civilians seeking refuge in UN facilities. The board also highlighted instances where IDF actions may have violated international humanitarian law. A similar inquiry in 2018 raised concerns about the excessive use of force by Israeli security forces during the “Great March of Return” protests in Gaza, in which UNRWA health workers providing medical assistance to protesters were injured or killed by Israeli gunfire.
Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have also published several reports documenting IDF attacks on UNRWA facilities and personnel. The Human Rights Watch report, “Gaza: IDF Violations in Rafah During the August 2014 Conflict,” for example, concluded that the IDF attack on a school in Rafah, which caused numerous civilian casualties including children, raised serious concerns about IDF compliance with international humanitarian law.
The Case for an Independent Review of Allegations
There is a longstanding perception among many in the Arab world that Western countries, especially the U.S. and certain European nations, have a pro-Israel bias in their foreign policies. The quick acceptance of the Israeli narrative about UNRWA by the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden and various European counterparts — without waiting for the results of an investigation into the allegations — reinforced beliefs about a predisposition to support Israeli positions over Palestinian ones.
There would be numerous benefits to supporting an independent review of the allegations given the shifting global dynamics that are undermining support for Israel and increasing criticism of Western nations for not doing more to pressure Israel to end the war. The conflict also poses challenges to further normalization efforts between Arab states and Israel in light of heightened public support for the Palestinian cause. There are signs that the tide may be shifting in Western capitals. President Biden recently called Israel’s response to Oct. 7 “over the top,” and the U.S. sanctioned Israeli settlers accused of using violence against Palestinians in the West Bank.
Most important, however, is the issue of humanitarian aid. If UNRWA cannot afford to continue its operations, who will step up to provide crucial services to an increasingly desperate and marginalized population?
Dr. Kristian Alexander is a Senior Fellow and the Director of International Security & Terrorism Program at TRENDS Research & Advisory (Dubai)
What Will Happen to UNRWA Funding for Palestinian Refugees?
By Kristian Alexander
Middle East & North Africa
Controversy over allegations that a dozen staff members participated in the Hamas assault on Israel last Oct. 7 has roiled the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).
Countries including the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and Canada have suspended funding to UNRWA, the principal organization providing urgently needed aid to between 2.5 and 3 million Palestinian refugees. Most are in the Gaza Strip, which has been under Israeli attack since Oct. 7. Nearly 30,000 people have died and a quarter of the population faces the threat of death from starvation.
UNRWA quickly fired those alleged to have been involved in the Hamas assault on Israel and started an investigation. Philippe Lazzarini, the agency’s Commissioner General, said that “any UNRWA employee who was involved in acts of terror will be held accountable, including through criminal prosecution.”
The agency now faces significant financial difficulties. UNRWA has warned that it will be difficult to provide essential services, including education, health care, and emergency relief beyond February 2024, potentially leading to a catastrophic humanitarian crisis, particularly among the over 1.5 million people forced to leave their homes in Gaza since Israel began strikes on the enclave.
UNRWA was established in 1949 to give assistance and protection to hundreds of thousands of Palestinians displaced during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war. Over the years, its mandate has evolved to serve the children and grandchildren of those refugees by providing education, health care, and social services. Of 5.9 million registered refugees, 1.78 million are registered in Gaza, 1.13 million in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, 2.56 million in Jordan, 679,000 in Syria, and 564,000 in Lebanon. About 1.5 million refugees live in 58 recognized camps.
UNRWA employs about 30,000 staff members, making it one of the largest UN programs in the Middle East. The majority of employees work in the field and many of them are descended from refugees.
Israel has treated the organization with suspicion and has long maintained that UNRWA poses a national security threat. Even before Oct. 7, Israel accused the agency of allowing its facilities and resources to be used by Palestinian militant groups such as Hamas. These allegations include claims that UNRWA schools have been used to store weapons and that militants have launched attacks on Israel from agency facilities.
Some claims have been substantiated in a few cases. During the 2014 Gaza war, for example, UNRWA itself reported discovering Hamas rockets in several vacant schools. UNRWA condemned the violations and removed the weapons. Another area of criticism focuses on the content of educational materials used in UNRWA schools, which Israel alleges foster anti-Israel sentiment. However, a comprehensive assessment in 2020 by a UNRWA oversight body found that agency textbooks largely adhered to UN values, such as neutrality, human rights, tolerance, and non-discrimination.
Critics have accused UNRWA of not doing enough to prevent members of militant groups from being involved in its programs. The vetting process is complicated by the fact that the agency operates in a highly politicized and conflict-prone environment. Checking every individual’s background is a massive undertaking that UNRWA financial constraints make difficult to achieve.
Not surprisingly, the political opinions of UNRWA staff, most of whom are teachers, tend to align with the refugees they serve, especially on issues such as resettlement and the right of refugees to return to historic Palestine. Some staff members may support violence to achieve these goals. Given that most staff, too, are refugees often living in camps, they may be reluctant to report rule violations due to fear of retribution from armed groups. It is important to distinguish, however, between individual views and the agency’s overarching humanitarian mandate. Conflating a UNRWA employee’s perspectives with the agency’s mission undermines the critical services the body provides under challenging circumstances.
Even if the allegations of direct involvement by a dozen staff on Oct. 7 are correct, Israel’s denunciation of UNRWA appears to be part of a broader strategic objective to shift the narrative around the Palestinian issue, diminishing international support for refugees to return to or be compensated for the homes they lost in 1948 or 1967. Israel sees UNRWA as perpetuating the problem and an obstacle to integrating the refugees into host countries, particularly Lebanon and Jordan.
The accusations against UNRWA emerged as the International Court of Justice gave a preliminary response to South African charges that Israel was committing acts of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. While it stopped short of calling for an immediate ceasefire, the ICJ condemned Israel’s actions and called for Israel to submit a report detailing steps to curtail civilian deaths. Former UNRWA administrator Lex Takkenberg suggested that Israel’s allegations were an attempt to undermine the ICJ ruling and deflect global scrutiny from Israel’s military assault on Gaza, which has drawn widespread condemnation from human rights groups and international communities.
However, the consequences of withdrawing support for UNRWA could be worse than allowing it to continue its work. It could cause heightened instability in the Middle East and fuel more Palestinian unrest and radicalization. This could have spillover effects in neighboring countries that host significant numbers of Palestinian refugees.
Many in the Arab world and Global South also perceive a double standard in the European and American response to the Gaza war compared to Western outrage over civilian casualties in other conflicts, such as Ukraine.
Following the 2014 Hamas-Israel war in Gaza, the UN established a board of inquiry to investigate incidents involving UN premises affected by Israeli military operations. The board found that several UNRWA schools and shelters were hit by Israeli airstrikes during the conflict. The report concluded that in some cases, there was evidence suggesting negligence by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) or disregard for the safety of civilians seeking refuge in UN facilities. The board also highlighted instances where IDF actions may have violated international humanitarian law. A similar inquiry in 2018 raised concerns about the excessive use of force by Israeli security forces during the “Great March of Return” protests in Gaza, in which UNRWA health workers providing medical assistance to protesters were injured or killed by Israeli gunfire.
Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have also published several reports documenting IDF attacks on UNRWA facilities and personnel. The Human Rights Watch report, “Gaza: IDF Violations in Rafah During the August 2014 Conflict,” for example, concluded that the IDF attack on a school in Rafah, which caused numerous civilian casualties including children, raised serious concerns about IDF compliance with international humanitarian law.
The Case for an Independent Review of Allegations
There is a longstanding perception among many in the Arab world that Western countries, especially the U.S. and certain European nations, have a pro-Israel bias in their foreign policies. The quick acceptance of the Israeli narrative about UNRWA by the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden and various European counterparts — without waiting for the results of an investigation into the allegations — reinforced beliefs about a predisposition to support Israeli positions over Palestinian ones.
There would be numerous benefits to supporting an independent review of the allegations given the shifting global dynamics that are undermining support for Israel and increasing criticism of Western nations for not doing more to pressure Israel to end the war. The conflict also poses challenges to further normalization efforts between Arab states and Israel in light of heightened public support for the Palestinian cause. There are signs that the tide may be shifting in Western capitals. President Biden recently called Israel’s response to Oct. 7 “over the top,” and the U.S. sanctioned Israeli settlers accused of using violence against Palestinians in the West Bank.
Most important, however, is the issue of humanitarian aid. If UNRWA cannot afford to continue its operations, who will step up to provide crucial services to an increasingly desperate and marginalized population?
Dr. Kristian Alexander is a Senior Fellow and the Director of International Security & Terrorism Program at TRENDS Research & Advisory (Dubai)
Recent & Related