The United States has approved a $30 million grant to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) to deliver urgent aid to Gaza, even as violence near distribution points continues to raise serious concerns. This marks Washington’s first direct financial contribution to GHF—an organisation previously backed only diplomatically. Instead of being audited or vetted by USAID, the foundation received the funding under a priority directive from the White House and State Department .
The GHF operates with U.S. logistics and private military contractors, setting up “secure” delivery sites. They claim to have provided more than 40 million meals without incident and only paused once to urge better protection from Israeli forces . Despite this, the U.N. reports that over 400 Palestinians have been killed near aid zones—some shot by Israeli forces, others caught in looting or crossfire. The violence underlines the fragility of aid efforts in areas laden with danger.
Critics within U.S. government raised alarm about GHF’s lack of financial transparency and experience. Skipping the standard USAID audit process, sources say, circumvented safeguards meant to prevent misuse of funds or extremist ties . Some officials are pushing back, believing that dollars should instead support established and neutral organizations. But proponents argue that the foundation’s model reduces aid diversion by Hamas and speeds up delivery to those in desperate need.
Meanwhile, the U.N. continues to struggle with limited access, Israeli operational restrictions, and rampant looting, which has frequently disrupted its aid convoys. The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation’s model remains controversial, balancing rapid meals delivery against military-style security that some view as compromising humanitarian neutrality.
With more monthly grants possible, the U.S. is wagering that this new approach can navigate Gaza’s twin crises of famine and conflict. But unless aid sites are better protected, the risk remains high. This intervention may shore up supply for now, yet unless it addresses the deadly chaos on the ground, its impact could be overshadowed by further tragedy.
