How Much Aid is Getting into Gaza?

Displaced Palestinians queue to receive food rations in northern Gaza, where a blistering Israeli assault is underway - AFP
Displaced Palestinians queue to receive food rations in northern Gaza, where a blistering Israeli assault is underway - AFP
TT

How Much Aid is Getting into Gaza?

Displaced Palestinians queue to receive food rations in northern Gaza, where a blistering Israeli assault is underway - AFP
Displaced Palestinians queue to receive food rations in northern Gaza, where a blistering Israeli assault is underway - AFP

Israel has announced steps to boost aid deliveries to Gaza, but UN figures show a huge drop in supplies getting through to the war-battered territory and humanitarian workers doubt much is reaching those who need it most.

Aid workers and experts told AFP that there were still many obstacles to getting desperately needed supplies to Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip's north, where intense Israeli military operations since early October have left hundreds dead.

Not only are there disputes over the actual volume of aid being allowed in, but agencies are often unable to reach people under constant bombardment, meaning it does not always make it where the dire humanitarian needs are greatest.

- How does aid enter Gaza? -

Most trucks carrying humanitarian supplies enter through the Kerem Shalom crossing on the border between Israel and the southern Gaza Strip.

The shipments are inspected by the Israeli military for security reasons, a process cited by humanitarian groups as the main factor behind the slow delivery of aid.

Israel, which imposed a siege on the Hamas-ruled territory in the early stages of the war last year, often blames the inability of relief organizations to handle and distribute large quantities of aid.

Once the aid enters Gaza, deliveries are subject to coordination with COGAT, an Israeli defence ministry agency that oversees civilian affairs in the Palestinian territories.

Many aid groups regularly report difficulties in communicating and coordinating with COGAT.

The distribution of aid is further complicated by shortages of fuel for trucks, war-damaged roads and looting, as well as fighting in densely populated areas and the repeated displacement of much of Gaza's 2.4 million people.

Several humanitarian officials told AFP on condition of anonymity that almost half of the aid that enters Gaza is being looted, especially basic supplies.

According to the United Nations, 396 trucks have entered Gaza so far in October, far below previous months.

In September 3,003 trucks got through, following 3,096 in August and 4,681 in July, according to UN figures which Israel's COGAT regularly disputes.

Some foreign countries have opted for dropping aid from the air. COGAT said 81 packages were parachuted into the narrow coastal territory on Saturday.

But this effort as well as a short-lived maritime aid corridor have not been able to meet the increasing needs of Gazans after more than a year of war.

- What has Israel said? -

A joint statement issued Tuesday by the military and COGAT said Israel "remains committed to facilitating humanitarian aid".

It came as the United States, Israel's top arms provider, has warned it may suspend some of its military assistance if Israel does not quickly improve humanitarian access to Gaza.

The Israeli statement highlighted patient transfers between hospitals in Gaza and the delivery of 68,650 litres of fuel to medical facilities across the territory -- many of which have been put out of service during the war.

The military has also announced that 30 World Food Program trucks were recently able to bring flour directly to northern Gaza, not via the southern Kerem Shalom crossing.

Tania Hary, head of Israeli rights group Gisha which monitors access into Gaza, said that "Israel has come under (diplomatic) pressure to allow more aid in, especially to the north".

She told AFP that only a ceasefire would enable humanitarian operations on the required scale.

"But short of that, genuine action and cooperation by the Israeli authorities could ensure the safe and free movement of aid," Hary said, but cautioned that she had seen no "genuine will" from the Israeli authorities throughout the war.

- What's the impact on the ground? -

Juliette Touma, spokeswoman for the UN agency for Palestinian refugees UNRWA, said there has been "no major change".

"What has come in is very, very little and is by far not enough in the face of the needs," Touma told AFP.

A displaced resident of the northern Jabalia area, a focus of the recent fighting, said the area "is being wiped out".

"If we don't die from the bombing and gunfire, we will die of hunger," said 42-year-old Umm Firas Shamiyah, demanding aid be sent to the north.

Sarah Davies, spokeswoman for the International Committee of the Red Cross, said that even if aid deliveries are boosted, the fighting makes it "very difficult to effectively distribute things to all those who need it".

A humanitarian worker whose group has a large presence on the ground said that some crucial items are banned by Israel.

"We're having great difficulty bringing in oxygen concentrates, generators and reconstruction equipment because the Israeli authorities consider them to be dual-purpose items that have both military and medical uses," he said.

"Some clinics are even running out of paracetamol," the common painkiller, the aid worker added.

"October has been catastrophic."



Iran Faces Tough Choices in Deciding How to Respond to Israeli Strikes

This satellite photo from Planet Labs PBC shows damaged buildings at Iran's Khojir military base outside of Tehran, Iran, Oct. 8, 2024. (Planet Labs PBC via AP)
This satellite photo from Planet Labs PBC shows damaged buildings at Iran's Khojir military base outside of Tehran, Iran, Oct. 8, 2024. (Planet Labs PBC via AP)
TT

Iran Faces Tough Choices in Deciding How to Respond to Israeli Strikes

This satellite photo from Planet Labs PBC shows damaged buildings at Iran's Khojir military base outside of Tehran, Iran, Oct. 8, 2024. (Planet Labs PBC via AP)
This satellite photo from Planet Labs PBC shows damaged buildings at Iran's Khojir military base outside of Tehran, Iran, Oct. 8, 2024. (Planet Labs PBC via AP)

It's Iran's move now.
How Iran chooses to respond to the unusually public Israeli aerial assault on its homeland could determine whether the region spirals further toward all-out war or holds steady at an already devastating and destabilizing level of violence.
In the coldly calculating realm of Middle East geopolitics, a strike of the magnitude that Israel delivered Saturday would typically be met with a forceful response. A likely option would be another round of the ballistic missile barrages that Iran has already launched twice this year, The Associated Press said.
Retaliating militarily would allow Iran's clerical leadership to show strength not only to its own citizens but also to Hamas in Gaza and Lebanon's Hezbollah, the militant groups battling Israel that are the vanguard of Tehran's so-called Axis of Resistance.
It is too soon to say whether Iran's leadership will follow that path.
Tehran may decide against forcefully retaliating directly for now, not least because doing so might reveal its weaknesses and invite a more potent Israeli response, analysts say.
“Iran will play down the impact of the strikes, which are in fact quite serious,” said Sanam Vakil, the director of the Middle East and North Africa program at the London-based think tank Chatham House.
She said Iran is “boxed in" by military and economic constraints, and the uncertainty caused by the US election and its impact on American policy in the region.
Even while the Mideast wars rage, Iran's reformist President Masoud Pezeshkian has been signaling his nation wants a new nuclear deal with the US to ease crushing international sanctions.
A carefully worded statement from Iran’s military Saturday night appeared to offer some wiggle room for Iran to back away from further escalation. It suggested that a cease-fire in the Gaza Strip and Lebanon was more important than any retaliation against Israel.
Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Iran's ultimate decision-maker, was also measured in his first comments on the strike Sunday. He said the attack “should not be exaggerated nor downplayed,” and he stopped short of calling for an immediate military response.
Saturday's strikes targeted Iranian air defense missile batteries and missile production facilities, according to the Israeli military.
With that, Israel has exposed vulnerabilities in Iran’s air defenses and can now more easily step up its attacks, analysts say.
Satellite photos analyzed by The Associated Press indicate Israel's raid damaged facilities at the Parchin military base southeast of Tehran that experts previously linked to Iran's onetime nuclear weapons program and another base tied to its ballistic missile program.
Current nuclear sites were not struck, however. Rafael Mariano Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, confirmed that on X, saying “Iran’s nuclear facilities have not been impacted.”
Israel has been aggressively bringing the fight to the Iranian-backed militant group Hezbollah, killing its leader and targeting operatives in an audacious exploding pager attack.
“Any Iranian attempt to retaliate will have to contend with the fact that Hezbollah, its most important ally against Israel, has been significantly degraded and its conventional weapons systems have twice been largely repelled,” said Ali Vaez, the Iran project director at the International Crisis Group, who expects Iran to hold its fire for now.
That's true even if Israel held back, as appears to be the case. Some prominent figures in Israel, such as opposition leader Yair Lapid, are already saying the attacks didn't go far enough.
Regional experts suggested that Israel's relatively limited target list was intentionally calibrated to make it easier for Iran to back away from escalation.
As Yoel Guzansky, who formerly worked for Israel’s National Security Council and is now a researcher at the Tel Aviv-based Institute for National Security Studies, put it: Israel's decision to focus on purely military targets allows Iran "to save face.”
Israel's target choices may also be a reflection at least in part of its capabilities. It is unlikely to be able to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities on its own and would require help from the United States, Guzansky said.
Besides, Israel still has leverage to go after higher-value targets should Iran retaliate — particularly now that nodes in its air defenses have been destroyed.
“You preserve for yourself all kinds of contingency plans,” Guzansky said.
Thomas Juneau, a University of Ottawa professor focused on Iran and the wider Middle East, wrote on X that the fact Iranian media initially downplayed the strikes suggests Tehran may want to avoid further escalation. Yet it's caught in a tough spot.
“If it retaliates, it risks an escalation in which its weakness means it loses more,” he wrote. “If it does not retaliate, it projects a signal of weakness.”
Vakil agreed that Iran's response was likely to be muted and that the strikes were designed to minimize the potential for escalation.
“Israel has yet again shown its military precision and capabilities are far superior to that of Iran,” she said.
One thing is certain: The Mideast is in uncharted territory.
For decades, leaders and strategists in the region have speculated about whether and how Israel might one day openly strike Iran, just as they wondered what direct attacks by Iran, rather than by its proxy militant groups, would look like.
Today, it's a reality. Yet the playbook on either side isn't clear, and may still be being written.
“There appears to be a major mismatch both in terms of the sword each side wields and the shield it can deploy,” Vaez said.
“While both sides have calibrated and calculated how quickly they climb the escalation ladder, they are in an entirely new territory now, where the new red lines are nebulous and the old ones have turned pink,” he said.