alleging that their militarized distribution system under the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) has turned humanitarian assistance sites into lethal areas, prompting Israeli forces and GHF contractors to open fire on starving civilians seeking aid, often leading to “regular bloodbaths.” Human Rights Watch/Hurriyet Daily News.
Mass Shootings at Humanitarian Sites
Between May 27 and July 31 of 2025, at least 859 Palestinians were shot by Israeli forces near GHF distribution centers – most often as they sought aid. UN data tracked by HRW indicates this symptomatic of Israel’s strategy to weaponize starvation – constituting potential war crimes and crimes against humanity, according to Hurriyet Daily News and Wikipedia data respectively. These aid-seeker deaths constitute potential war crimes or crimes against humanity according to HRW research +11 HRW +11. Hurriyet Daily News +11 Human Rights Watch +11 Wikipedia = +11
Belkis Wille, Human Rights Watch’s Associate Director for Crisis and Conflict Response stated:
US-backed Israeli forces and private contractors have implemented an ineffective and militarized aid distribution system which has turned aid distributions into regular bloodbaths.”
The Guardian. mes Human Rights Watch. and Hurriyet Daily News all concurred with this statement.
Humanitarian Catastrophe Under an Aid Mask The GHF scheme was inaugurated at the conclusion of an 11-week Israeli blockade and intended to streamline deliveries ostensibly; but Human Rights Watch warns of its deadly crowd-control tactics; survivors have termed these aid points “death traps” or “slaughter masquerading as aid,” with Medecins Sans Frontieres echoing this sentiment by condemning violence at these aid points (The New Arab, Wikipedia).
As of mid-July, UN and Gaza Ministry figures were clear: over 1,000 Palestinians had died at or near aid sites – with 766 attributed directly to GHF centers and another 288 to convoy incidents; more than 4,800 individuals have also been wounded. (Wikipedia +8 and Human Rights Watch each respectively provided figures).
Conflicting Narratives
GHF and Israeli authorities dispute HRW’s claims, insisting only warning shots were fired outside active aid hours. They blame Hamas and chaotic crowd behavior for any fatalities at distribution centers; GHF notes only one known fatal incident during its operations–a crowd crush in mid-July which they attribute to operational mismanagement rather than gunfire. For more details about the facts regarding Gaza please see Wikipedia here
International Reactions
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has joined in calling for an independent probe, while UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres condemned the killings as appalling. UNRWA head Philippe Lazzarini described UNRWA’s aid model as being distractive from providing broad humanitarian access, labeling its aid model “an abomination.” Wikipedia mes Wikipedia +1
U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff recently visited GHF sites in Rafah, sparking international controversy as rights groups questioned its safety and legitimacy. RFI, Al Jazeera and AP News all covered this story extensively.
+8 A joint statement by over 20 countries–including European Union member states, Canada, Japan and Australia–expressed their disapproval with this model, characterizing it as risky and destabilizing while advocating adherence to humanitarian norms. (Wikipedia).
Long-Term Consequences and Legal Implications HRW and fourteen other NGOs caution that GHF could face litigation for complicity in war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide due to its lethal aid distribution model. The Center for Constitutional Rights has already identified it as potentially legally liable.
Reuters +4 Wikoreinigt Wiki +1 Wizo
Human Rights Watch’s assessment marks a pivotal moment in the narrative surrounding aid in Gaza. What was initially presented as lifesaving initiatives is increasingly perceived as systemically hazardous–involving food distribution being linked with lethal crowd control measures and entrenched blockade policies. Such accusations raise urgent questions regarding international actors’ complicity as well as whether humanitarian channels can operate safely under militaryized oversight.