Gaza Aid Effort Faces Scrutiny Amid Trump-Era Roots

New Foundation Emerges from Pro-Israel Ecosystem, Drawing US Funding

A controversial initiative to provide humanitarian aid in Gaza has emerged from discussions involving figures linked to the Trump administration and pro-Israel advocacy, raising questions about its effectiveness and motivations.

Origins of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation

The genesis of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) is rooted in a broader environment surrounding former President **Donald Trump**. For decades, a hardline pro-Israel narrative has sought to undermine the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), which has been critical for humanitarian assistance to Palestinians.

This narrative, amplified within the right-wing ecosystem in the U.S., has frequently misrepresented UNRWA and the broader United Nations. Claims that the UN is inherently biased against Israel have implicated humanitarian organizations operating under its umbrella.

When U.S. officials did not effectively counter these claims by highlighting independent investigations into UNRWA, it weakened a professional humanitarian aid system. This system possesses the expertise to deliver aid efficiently and safely.

Political Landscape and Shifting Priorities

The aid apparatus was perceived as vulnerable by the time **Donald Trump** took office, with significant cuts to global humanitarian funding early in his term. The Israel-Palestine context presented an opportunity for those seeking to dismantle existing structures.

Figures within the “Trump ecosystem,” including Christian Zionists and some congressional hardliners, saw a chance to replace the established aid framework entirely. This ambition, however, has not yet translated into demonstrable improvements.

Discussions leading to the GHF involved Israeli officials, academics, U.S. veterans, security contractors like Safe Reach Solutions, and the consulting firm Boston Consulting Group (BCG), which has since distanced itself from the project.

“The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation emerged from discussions among Israeli officials, academics, some US veterans and security contractors who remain involved (particularly a company called Safe Reach Solutions), and the US consulting conglomerate, Boston Consulting Group (BCG), which has now abandoned and disavowed the project.”

—Akbar Shahid Ahmed, Reporter

There was a perception that a tech-based, non-governmental solution could bypass existing, often criticized, aid channels. While reporting has not uncovered direct evidence of the Trump administration fostering the scheme, individuals advocating for it found the administration receptive.

U.S. Involvement and PR Focus

Upon its unveiling, the U.S. government quickly became the primary donor to the GHF, despite initial claims of non-involvement. Executive chairman **Johnnie Moore**, known for his early support of **Trump**, acts as a spokesperson but lacks extensive aid expertise.

The U.S. role has been characterized as enabling the ongoing crisis in Gaza, with severe rates of malnutrition and dehydration. A significant focus remains on public relations and narrative management, aiming to improve Israel’s image within the conflict.

Efforts to sideline independent aid operators are evident. UN and EU officials have faced visa denials, preventing access to Gaza, while foreign journalists have been restricted in their movements.

The GHF, conversely, asserts its significant aid deliveries, stating it provides tens of thousands of items and ingredients daily. However, the foundation reportedly rejects accusations of deliberately targeting Palestinians and often denies killings, even when corroborated by hospital staff and families.

“Children’s bodies are eating themselves in Gaza because of choices over aid.”

—Akbar Shahid Ahmed, Reporter

The reality on the ground for Palestinians includes severe famine, with one doctor describing the situation as children’s bodies “auto-digesting.” These conditions are attributed to decisions regarding aid distribution.

U.S. official **Brett McGurk** has been instrumental in shaping the U.S. approach to the Gaza war. His recent commentary focuses on how Israel can be perceived positively, highlighting a continued emphasis on perception over saving lives.

For instance, in April 2024, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs reported that only a fraction of planned aid convoys to northern Gaza were approved, illustrating challenges in aid delivery.