What Went Wrong with the Gaza Aid Plan? Resignations, Bloodshed, and Global Rebuke

The newly launched humanitarian initiative for the Gaza Strip, established in coordination between Israel and the United States to combat the worsening hunger crisis, is already facing major setbacks in its first week of operation, according to an in-depth Washington Post investigation. The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), tasked with distributing food through a new and ambitious system meant to bypass Hamas control, is experiencing both internal and external turmoil.

The crisis began when American consulting firm Boston Consulting Group (BCG) announced it would terminate its involvement in the project and withdraw its team from Tel Aviv. Sources familiar with the initiative said BCG wasn’t just an advisor but played a central role in designing the entire aid mechanism, ranging from pricing and payment systems to the establishment of food distribution centers in southern Gaza. While the company claimed its work was provided pro bono, other sources revealed it had submitted monthly invoices amounting to over $1 million. One of BCG’s senior partners leading the project was also placed on leave pending an internal investigation. In addition, two senior GHF officials resigned, raising serious concerns that the initiative may collapse before fully taking off.

Despite reports of over 7 million food rations distributed within just eight day, an achievement the foundation highlights as proof of the model’s effectiveness, eyewitnesses and medical teams in Gaza reported dozens of casualties from gunfire near distribution sites. The IDF said an investigation had been launched into gunfire directed at "several suspects who deviated from designated access routes." Previously, the IDF claimed it fired warning shots over the heads of crowds to deter unrest and denied targeting civilians, calling such accusations "Hamas propaganda." The IDF also released footage allegedly showing Hamas operatives firing at civilians to blame Israel for the violence.

Alongside these security and operational issues, the initiative is facing a harsh international backlash. The UN, the World Food Programme (WFP), and several other humanitarian organizations have refused to take part, arguing the plan violates principles of humanitarian neutrality and gives Israel full control over the scope and distribution paths of the aid. "What is needed now is an immediate ceasefire, open access for all organizations, and an end to this catastrophe," said WFP director Cindy McCain, adding that small UN aid convoys allowed into Gaza last week were looted by desperate civilians before reaching their destinations.

Some Israeli security officials have also expressed scepticism about the current model, warning that crowding at aid sites could lead to violent incidents. Meanwhile, the foundation continues operations on the ground with armed American contractors securing convoys and distribution points, but the fragility of the initiative is becoming increasingly evident. "Whether we like it or not, Israel is setting the rules in Gaza right now," said one professional who declined an offer to join the foundation’s leadership. "There’s no such thing as neutral aid, this is the reality."