Pages

Wednesday, June 18, 2025

The Humanitarian Situation In Gaza

 




The humanitarian situation in Gaza as of June 2025 is catastrophic, marked by severe food insecurity, widespread displacement, and a collapsed healthcare system. Hamas maintains a significant but weakened presence, with visible administrative and security roles, though their popular support has declined to around 20-35%, driven by war fatigue and dissatisfaction with their governance.

Humanitarian Situation in Gaza
The crisis in Gaza is dire, with multiple sources describing it as one of the worst humanitarian disasters globally:
  • Famine and Food Insecurity: The entire population of 2.1 million faces acute food insecurity, with nearly 500,000 in catastrophic hunger (IPC Phase 5). Since March 2, 2025, a complete Israeli blockade halted all humanitarian aid, exacerbating starvation. Over 70,000 children under five are projected to face acute malnutrition in the next year, with 57 reported deaths from malnutrition by May 2025. Food infrastructure, including bakeries and mills, has been destroyed, and 90% of Gaza’s population faces crisis-level food shortages.
  • Displacement: Over 1.9 million people (nearly 90% of the population) have been displaced, many multiple times, with 81% of Gaza under Israeli militarized zones or displacement orders. Over 599,000 were displaced again after the March 2025 ceasefire collapse.
  • Healthcare Collapse: Only 17 of 36 hospitals are partially functional, with 47% of hospital medications and all chronic disease treatments unavailable. The sole water desalination plant in northern Gaza is inoperative, and children receive just 1.5 liters of water daily (below the 3-liter survival minimum). Attacks on healthcare facilities have killed over 660 people, including 150 UN workers.
  • Infrastructure and Aid Blockade: A March-May 2025 blockade stopped all aid, depleting food, fuel, and medical supplies. The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a U.S.-backed initiative, resumed limited aid in late May but can only feed half the population. UN agencies report 850 incidents impacting their facilities, with 767 deaths in UNRWA shelters.
  • Casualties: Between October 7, 2023, and June 11, 2025, over 55,000 Palestinians were reportedly killed and 127,000 injured, with 15,600 children among the dead. These figures, from Gaza’s Ministry of Health, are contested but align with UN estimates.
The blockade, airstrikes, and restrictions on aid have been criticized as deliberate by UN experts, with some alleging genocidal intent, though Israel denies this, claiming Hamas diverts aid.
Hamas Presence in Gaza
Hamas remains a visible force in Gaza despite significant losses:
  • Administrative Control: Hamas retains control over parts of Gaza’s civilian administration, with police patrolling streets and ministries reopening post-ceasefire in January 2025. Aid workers report Hamas’ presence is “visible” at main junctions, suggesting they maintain order in some areas.
  • Military Capacity: Hamas’ military wing, the Sahm Force, is weakened, reduced from 30,000 fighters to a few thousand, many hiding in tunnels. They are accused of stealing aid, particularly in Rafah, and taxing shipments to fund operations. Israel claims Hamas operates from civilian infrastructure, like hospitals, though evidence is disputed.
  • Tunnels and Leadership: Hamas is reportedly digging contingency tunnels into Egypt for potential leadership escape, indicating strategic retreat planning.
Hamas Support Among Gaza’s Population
Support for Hamas has waned but persists due to ideological and religious factors:
  • Polling Data: A February 2025 survey showed Hamas’ support at around 20%, down from 50% in March 2024, reflecting war fatigue and blame for Gaza’s destruction. Historically, support hovers around 30-35%. Many Gazans feel no leadership truly represents them, with half favoring a military over a diplomatic solution.
  • Ideological Base: Despite declining popularity, a conservative Islamist base ensures Hamas or similar groups retain a niche. About half of Gazans view the conflict as religious, aligning with Hamas’ ideology of Islamic rule.
  • Public Sentiment: Posts on X and UN reports suggest frustration with Hamas’ aid diversion and governance failures, but their visible presence and resistance narrative maintain some loyalty.
Critical Notes
  • Contested Claims: Israel’s assertions that Hamas diverts aid lack verified evidence, per Amnesty International, while Hamas accuses Israel of blocking aid to starve civilians. Both sides manipulate narratives, complicating the truth.
  • GHF Controversy: The U.S.-backed GHF, designed to bypass Hamas, is criticized by UN agencies as inadequate and politicized, potentially giving Israel more control over aid.
  • X Posts: Social media reflects polarized views, with some claiming Hamas’ collapse is imminent, while others highlight their resilience. These posts are inconclusive without corroboration.
The situation is fluid, with Hamas weakened but not eradicated, and public support eroded but not eliminated. The humanitarian crisis, driven by blockade and conflict, overshadows political dynamics, with no immediate resolution in sight.






The endgame for Gaza in June 2025 remains highly uncertain, shaped by ongoing conflict, a dire humanitarian crisis, and competing visions for the region’s future. Below, we outline potential endgame scenarios, possible resolutions, timelines, leading roadmaps, and the most likely outcome based on available information.
Endgame Scenarios for Gaza
The trajectory of Gaza’s conflict hinges on military, political, and humanitarian dynamics. Several scenarios are plausible:
  1. Prolonged Israeli Occupation: Israel could maintain a long-term military presence, controlling Gaza’s territory with a military governor, as suggested by some Israeli officials. This would involve displacing Palestinians to shrinking “humanitarian zones” or encouraging “voluntary” emigration, potentially to Egypt or Jordan. This scenario risks international condemnation and accusations of ethnic cleansing, with significant resistance from Palestinians and regional actors.
  2. Hamas’ Partial Survival as a Guerrilla Force: Despite Israel’s campaign, Hamas could persist as a weakened insurgent group, melting into the population and using tunnels for guerrilla warfare. This would perpetuate low-intensity conflict, with Israel conducting regular raids, similar to its West Bank operations.
  3. Power Vacuum and Chaos: If Hamas is dismantled without a governance alternative, Gaza could descend into chaos, with warlords, clans, or other extremist groups like ISIS filling the void. This would exacerbate the humanitarian crisis and create new security threats for Israel and the region.
  4. Restoration of Palestinian Authority (PA) Rule: A reformed PA could take over Gaza’s administration, backed by moderate Arab states and international support. This would require Israeli approval and significant reforms to address the PA’s unpopularity and corruption.
  5. International or Regional Stabilization: An international trusteeship or Arab-led peacekeeping force could govern Gaza temporarily, overseeing reconstruction and elections. This is less likely due to logistical challenges and opposition from both Israel and Hamas.
Possible Resolution
A viable resolution would likely involve a ceasefire, hostage-prisoner exchanges, and a transitional governance framework. Key elements include:
  • Ceasefire and Hostage Release: A multi-phase deal, similar to the January 2025 ceasefire, could pause hostilities, free remaining hostages (59 as of April 2025, ~24 alive), and release Palestinian prisoners.
  • Transitional Governance: A technocratic Palestinian committee, potentially backed by Egypt, Qatar, or the UAE, could administer Gaza temporarily, sidelining both Hamas and the PA. This would require Israeli security guarantees and international funding.
  • Reconstruction and Aid: Massive aid inflows, supported by Gulf states and Western donors, are critical to address famine, rebuild infrastructure, and provide medical care for Gaza’s 2.1 million people, including 13,455–17,550 child amputees.
  • Long-Term Political Horizon: A credible path toward a two-state solution, as demanded by Saudi Arabia, could stabilize the region. This includes addressing the Palestinian right of return and Israeli settlement expansion.
Timeline
  • Short-Term (6–12 months): A ceasefire could be renegotiated by late 2025 or early 2026 if mediators like Qatar and Egypt leverage pressure from the U.S. and Arab states. The January 2025 ceasefire showed progress is possible, but Israel’s March 2025 offensive and blockade suggest political will is lacking.
  • Medium-Term (1–3 years): Transitional Arrangements, such as a Palestinian technocratic council or international oversight, could emerge if Hamas is further weakened and Israel agrees to a governance alternative. Reconstruction would begin, but full recovery could take decades.
  • Long-Term (5+ years): A permanent resolution, like a two-state solution, is unlikely before 2030 due to entrenched mistrust, Israeli domestic politics, and Palestinian divisions.
Leading Resolution Roadmaps
Several proposals are being floated, though none have universal support:
  1. Egyptian Proposal (2024–2025): Egypt has pushed for a temporary Palestinian technocratic committee to govern Gaza for six months, followed by elections and reconstruction. Palestinian factions have shown flexibility, but Israel’s rejection of a permanent ceasefire stalls progress.
  2. U.S.-Backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF): Launched in May 2025, the GHF aims to deliver aid and bypass Hamas, with U.S. mercenaries guarding distribution hubs. Critics, including UN agencies, call it inadequate and a tool for Israeli control. It lacks a clear governance plan.
  3. Saudi-Led Regional Plan: Saudi Arabia has tied normalization with Israel to a “credible pathway” for a two-state solution, potentially involving Gulf funding and peacekeeping forces. This hinges on Israeli concessions, which Netanyahu’s coalition resists.
  4. Israeli “Gaza Riviera” Vision: Proposed by Trump and supported by some Israeli officials, this plan envisions relocating Palestinians to Egypt or Jordan and redeveloping Gaza. It’s widely criticized as ethnic cleansing and rejected by Egypt and Jordan.
  5. UN/International Framework: The January 2025 ceasefire, backed by UN Resolution 2735, outlined a three-phase plan: hostage-prisoner exchanges, Israeli withdrawal, and reconstruction. Its collapse in March 2025 shows the challenge of enforcement.
Most Likely Outcome
The most probable outcome in the near term (2025–2026) is a prolonged Israeli occupation with partial Hamas insurgency.
  • Why Likely: Israel’s current strategy, under Operation Gideon’s Chariots, aims for permanent territorial control, with 70% of Gaza already under military buffer zones. Netanyahu’s coalition, backed by Trump, shows no interest in a permanent ceasefire or PA rule. Hamas, though weakened (75% of its military capacity destroyed), retains enough fighters and tunnels to sustain guerrilla attacks.
  • Implications: This scenario will deepen the humanitarian crisis, with famine risks escalating (500,000 in IPC Phase 5) and displacement continuing. International pressure, including ICC warrants against Israeli leaders, may grow, but U.S. support for Israel limits enforcement. Regional instability could worsen if Egypt or Jordan face refugee pressures.
  • Challenges to Alternatives: The Egyptian plan and UN framework require Israeli concessions, which are unlikely given Netanyahu’s reliance on far-right coalition partners. The PA’s unpopularity and Hamas’ ideological base (20–35% support) complicate governance transitions. Gulf states are willing to fund reconstruction but hesitate without security guarantees.
Critical Notes
  • Contested Narratives: Israel claims its actions target Hamas, but UN experts and human rights groups argue the blockade and bombings constitute war crimes or genocide. Hamas’ aid diversion and hostage retention further muddy the moral landscape.
  • X Sentiment: Posts on X reflect polarized views, with some advocating a two-state solution and others supporting Israeli annexation or Palestinian relocation. These are inconclusive but highlight the lack of consensus.
  • External Factors: Trump’s permissive stance and the ICC’s September 2025 deadline for ending Israel’s occupation add pressure but may not shift Israel’s strategy.
Without a breakthrough in negotiations or a shift in Israeli policy, Gaza faces a protracted conflict with devastating humanitarian costs.






at
Labels: , ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)