ICJ: Israel Must Facilitate UNRWA Gaza Aid

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has issued a significant advisory opinion, ruling that Israel is obligated to permit the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) and other U.N.-led aid agencies to deliver humanitarian assistance to the Gaza Strip. This decision, which comes in response to a request from the UN General Assembly and amidst concerns over "starvation as a weapon of war," underscores Israel's legal duties to facilitate relief efforts by UN entities in the war-torn territory. The ruling has been welcomed by UNRWA and other humanitarian organizations, while Israel has categorically rejected its findings.

Key Developments

The Hague-based ICJ, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, stated unequivocally that Israel "is under the obligation to agree to and facilitate relief schemes provided by the United Nations and its entities, including UNRWA," and has specifically ordered Israel to restore access to U.N.-led aid agencies. This pronouncement follows a request from the UN General Assembly to determine Israel's legal obligations regarding aid to Gaza, particularly after Israel had reportedly passed laws effectively banning UNRWA from operating in the territory.

A crucial aspect of the Court's advisory opinion addressed Israel's allegations that UNRWA is infiltrated by Hamas. The ICJ found that Israel had not "substantiated the allegations" against the agency. This finding directly challenges a key argument Israel has used to justify its restrictions on UNRWA's operations. The Court also highlighted the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza, stating that the population had been "inadequately supplied" and that Israel was required to ensure "the basic needs of the local population" are met, explicitly addressing concerns that "starvation is being used as a weapon of war" in the territory.

Philippe Lazzarini, the Commissioner-General of UNRWA, welcomed the ICJ's "unambiguous ruling," emphasizing that it affirmed UNRWA as the "key humanitarian actor" with a "unique and sustained connection" to the occupied Palestinian territories. He noted that the ruling also called for accountability for the killing of UNRWA staff, the mistreatment of humanitarian personnel in detention, and the destruction or misuse of UNRWA facilities.

Background and Context

The request for an advisory opinion from the ICJ stemmed from the UN General Assembly's concerns over Israel's policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Advisory opinions, while not legally binding in the same way as judgments in contentious cases between states, carry significant legal weight and moral authority, contributing to the clarification and development of international law. They serve as authoritative legal advice for UN organs and specialized agencies.

UNRWA, established by the UN General Assembly in 1949, holds a humanitarian and development mandate to provide assistance and protection to Palestine refugees. Its services, which include basic education, primary healthcare, relief, social services, microcredit, and emergency assistance, are crucial for millions of registered Palestine refugees across its five fields of operation: Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. The agency's mandate has been consistently renewed by the General Assembly, underscoring its vital role.

In Gaza, UNRWA has traditionally been the largest humanitarian actor, employing over 10,000 staff whose experience is essential for effective aid delivery. However, its operations have faced severe challenges, including an "unlawful Israel Knesset ban" and a communication shutdown with Israeli authorities. Since March, Israel has not allowed UNRWA to bring in its supplies, despite the agency having 6,000 trucks of aid waiting to enter Gaza. Despite these restrictions, UNRWA continues to operate, providing approximately two-thirds of the aid flowing into Gaza post-ceasefire, including food for 750,000 people and water for 450,000.

The humanitarian situation in Gaza is described as "unbearable and deteriorating sharply." A famine has been declared in the Gaza Governorate, with 2.1 million people facing extreme hunger and 470,000 on the brink of mass starvation. Food supplies have nearly run out, the medical system is shattered, and only a trickle of humanitarian aid has been able to enter. The Israeli blockade at the start of the war led to critical shortages of fuel, food, medication, water, and essential medical supplies. Widespread destruction has generated over 61 million tons of debris, further exacerbating the crisis. Over 380 UNRWA staff members have been killed since the conflict began.

Implications and Analysis

Israel has "categorically rejected" the ICJ's advisory opinion, labeling it a "political attempt" to impose measures against Israel under the guise of international law. The Israeli Foreign Ministry asserted that the court ignored "extensive evidence" provided by Israel regarding what it claims is Hamas's "infiltration" of UNRWA and the organization's complicity in terrorist activities. Israel maintains it will not cooperate with an organization it believes is "infested with terror activity" and rejects what it perceives as the politicization of international law, particularly in light of the broader order to restore access to all U.N.-led aid agencies and the Court's concerns regarding "starvation as a weapon of war." Israel had previously denied violating international law, calling the court's proceedings biased, and did not attend the hearings in April, though it did provide a 38-page written submission.

The ICJ's advisory opinion, while not directly enforceable like a judgment, carries significant international legal and moral weight. It reinforces the international community's expectation that Israel, as an UN Member State, must adhere to its obligations under international law to facilitate humanitarian aid, especially given the explicit order to restore access to all U.N.-led aid agencies and the grave concerns about "starvation as a weapon of war." The ruling's dismissal of Israel's unsubstantiated claims against UNRWA could bolster the agency's standing and its ability to advocate for unimpeded access to Gaza.

For the Palestinian population in Gaza, the ruling offers a glimmer of hope for increased and more consistent aid delivery, which is desperately needed to address the catastrophic humanitarian conditions. The decision places renewed pressure on Israel to reconsider its restrictions on UNRWA and other U.N.-led aid agencies, and to ensure that humanitarian assistance reaches those in need without obstruction. The Palestinian Ambassador to the Netherlands, Ammar Hijazi, welcomed the decision as "clear, unequivocal and conclusive," leaving Israel with "no pretext, no context, no excuse" to ban UNRWA or impede other aid efforts.

The advisory opinion contributes to the ongoing discourse on international humanitarian law and the responsibilities of states in conflict zones. Its impact will depend on how the international community, and particularly the parties involved, respond to its authoritative guidance. The ruling serves as a stark reminder of the urgent need for humanitarian access and protection in Gaza, and the critical role of organizations like UNRWA in alleviating human suffering.