Israel’s Ban on UNRWA Access to Gaza Signals Deteriorating UN Relations

As relations between Israel and the United Nations reach a new low, the Israeli Knesset is poised to pass legislation that could effectively shut down the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) in Gaza and the West Bank. This development marks a significant escalation in the ongoing tensions between the two parties, potentially reshaping the landscape of humanitarian aid in the region.

Legislative Actions Against UNRWA

The impending passage of bills aimed at curtailing UNRWA’s operations reflects Israel’s long-standing grievances against the agency, which have intensified following accusations of UNRWA staff involvement in the October 7 attacks. The proposed legislation signals a shift in Israel’s approach, suggesting a desire to sever ties with an organization it perceives as increasingly aligned with Hamas. Former Defence Minister Benny Gantz articulated this sentiment, stating, “UNRWA has chosen to make itself an inseparable component of Hamas’s mechanism – and now is the time to detach ourselves entirely from it… Instead of fulfilling its purpose and improving the lives of refugees, UNRWA does the opposite and perpetuates their victimization.”

The potential fallout from the Knesset’s decision is grave. With over 2.4 million Palestinians relying on UNRWA for aid, education, and health services, shutting down the agency could leave millions vulnerable. Although Western nations have expressed doubts about UNRWA’s neutrality, they still regard it as the best option available for delivering essential services to Palestinians.

Urgent Legislative Timeline and Implications

On October 6, the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee passed two critical bills, expected to be presented to the Knesset plenum by October 28. These measures reportedly enjoy the support of around 100 out of 120 Knesset members, indicating a strong cross-party consensus.

One of the bills seeks to prohibit UNRWA from operating within Israeli territory, mandating that the agency “shall not establish any representation, provide any services or conduct any activities within the territory of Israel.” If enacted, this would close UNRWA’s East Jerusalem headquarters and terminate visas for its staff. Critics, including Adalah—a legal centre for Arab minority rights—argue that this move contravenes International Court of Justice directives mandating Israeli cooperation with UN humanitarian efforts.

International Response and Historical Context

The response to this potential legislation has been widespread condemnation, with ambassadors from 123 member states expressing their opposition. The urgency of the situation has drawn the attention of the United States; Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin jointly warned that “enacting such restrictions would devastate the humanitarian response in Gaza at this critical moment and deny essential educational and social services to tens of thousands of Palestinians in the West Bank and Jerusalem.” Despite these concerns, U.S. Congress has yet to restore funding to UNRWA, contrasting with the support extended by other Western nations.

Historically, the relationship between Israel and UNRWA has oscillated between necessary cooperation and bitter antagonism. Until the recent attacks, UNRWA performed vital relief work that alleviated some responsibilities from Israel, a position that has now been fundamentally challenged.

UNRWA’s Leadership and Ongoing Challenges

Philippe Lazzarini, the chief of UNRWA, has taken steps to address allegations against his staff, asserting that he acted decisively to terminate relevant employees following a review of their alleged involvement in the October attacks. Lazzarini also noted that previous Israeli efforts to deliver aid through alternative channels have not met the needs of the population.

Despite Israel’s increasing hostility, UNRWA maintains that it is uniquely positioned to deliver comprehensive aid and services, a role that no other UN agency can effectively assume.

Israel’s Stance on International Law and Security

The Israeli government, under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has adopted a hardline stance against what it perceives as UN interference, arguing that national security must take precedence over international legal frameworks. Netanyahu has been quoted as saying, “better a bad press than a good eulogy,” emphasizing the administration’s prioritization of Israel’s security over diplomatic relations with the UN.

The historical roots of Israeli discontent with the UN extend back decades. Israeli leaders have long accused the UN of harboring antisemitism, with Netanyahu himself stating in 1984 that his role at the UN was to “light the candle of truth in a house of darkness.”

Recent Developments and Future Implications

The deteriorating relationship reached a new climax recently when UN Secretary-General António Guterres was declared persona non grata in Israel. This decision followed Guterres’ comments regarding the October attacks, which he noted did not occur in isolation, and his descriptions of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza as among the worst he had witnessed during his tenure.

In his address to the UN General Assembly, Netanyahu decried the organization as “a swamp of antisemitic bile,” criticizing the UN for its perceived bias against Israel. He also underscored his longstanding belief that Israel has been unjustly singled out for condemnation amidst global injustices.

As Israel continues to assert its narrative on the international stage, tensions with the UN are likely to escalate. The ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza, compounded by potential legislative changes, raises critical questions about the future of international aid in the region and the broader implications for Israel’s relationship with the global community.

ALSO READ: Justin Trudeau Faces Resignation Calls from Liberal Party: Will He Step Down?