Featured

GAZA: ‘The attacks and disinformation campaign against UNRWA are aimed at dismantling it’

JonathanFowlerCIVICUS speaks with Jonathan Fowler of the United Nations Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), about the agency’s role in Gaza and the challenges it faces.

Established after the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, UNRWA is the UN agency tasked with supporting the welfare and human development of Palestine refugees. It’s funded almost entirely by voluntary contributions from UN member states.

What’s UNRWA’s role?

UNRWA was established by the UN General Assembly in 1949 to deal with the effects of the refugee crisis caused by the Arab-Israeli war. Its initial mandate was to meet immediate humanitarian needs, but over the years it evolved and expanded to include a wide range of services.

We are a unique agency in the UN system. We are not an advisory agency – we are direct providers of education, healthcare, relief and social services, camp infrastructure and improvement, microfinance and emergency relief.

UNRWA employs some 30,000 staff, most of whom are Palestine refugees. We are the agency with the largest presence in Gaza, where 13,000 staff were engaged in pre-war operations, notably in education. Recently, the agency has suffered an unprecedented number of casualties among its staff, with 189 members losing their lives. There are still 3,500 to 4,000 people working heroically on the ground, while the rest have been forced to flee.

UNRWA’s work extends beyond Gaza. We also work in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, as well as Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. Each place has its own challenges.

In the context of a dire humanitarian crisis such as the war in Gaza, we have shifted to a more traditional humanitarian role. Because of our size, we’re the backbone of humanitarian operations in Gaza. We are indispensable to other parts of the UN system that rely on our logistics on the ground.

How has UNRWA responded to accusations of collaboration with Hamas?

Over the years UNRWA has faced a number of allegations of breaches of neutrality by its staff. We work in a highly politicised environment, but we’re not here to reconcile different narratives about the conflict or the history of the region – we’re here to help Palestinian refugees. We believe in the need for a just and lasting solution to the refugee crisis, but our goal and mission are primarily humanitarian, not political.

While staff are allowed to have their opinions, neutrality is essential for any UN official. But in a large organisation like ours, there will inevitably be occasional breaches of neutrality. When they occur, we conduct internal – and sometimes external – investigations.

We strongly condemned the Hamas attacks on civilians on 7 October. They were abhorrent and unacceptable, and completely contrary to international humanitarian law.

But at the end of January, we were faced with allegations that 12 of our staff were involved in the 7 October attacks. We acted swiftly in what we call ‘reverse due process’, which is something the executive authority of any UN agency can do in situations where it’s deemed essential to protect ongoing operations. Our Commissioner-General, Philippe Lazzarini, terminated the staff members’ contracts and referred the investigation to the UN’s top investigative body, the Office of Internal Oversight Services.

These allegations were later expanded to involve 19 people. We are talking about a tiny percentage of the 30,000 people working for UNRWA. So, the real story here is that in an extremely high-pressure and politicised environment, the vast majority of our staff have remained neutral.

However, these incidents were misconstrued by Israeli officials and media, leading to unfounded claims that Hamas has infiltrated UNRWA. Allegations against individual staff were turned into accusations against the whole agency. Supporters and social media amplified the claim. It was an attempt to smear our agency. Our detractors want to portray us as part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

How have these allegations affected your work?

Unfortunately, the allegations gained enough traction to cause several UN member states, including major donors, to suspend funding to our organisation at a time when we’re dealing with the biggest humanitarian crisis in the region in decades.

This became a huge problem for us. Underfunding constrains our operations and puts our staff at risk. Our facilities have been affected by the war and repeatedly targeted. More than 160 of our facilities have been hit in over 300 separate incidents. Hundreds of people seeking safety in shelters under the UN flag have been injured or killed.

We have also been refused permission by the Israeli authorities to deliver aid to northern Gaza, exacerbating the ongoing humanitarian crisis. In the West Bank, our staff are routinely intimidated and denied access to our offices in East Jerusalem. In East Jerusalem, our office has been the target of regular protests, vandalism and, most recently, arson attacks.

We believe in freedom of expression, but not in violence. Some people, including a deputy mayor of Jerusalem, have incited crowds. Their highly inflammatory language soon became real flames. We expected the deputy mayor to apologise, or at least acknowledge these weren’t the right means. But instead, he ramped up his aggressive rhetoric and singled out the next compounds to be attacked. We’re worried about what might come next and whether this campaign of intimidation and active violence might turn into something more serious.

All in all, the attacks and the disinformation campaign are aimed at dismantling the agency. But we are committed to fulfilling our mandate. We believe passionately in what we do and why we do it. And we count on the invaluable support of UN member states that have publicly affirmed that UN entities have diplomatic privileges and immunities that protect us and our mission.

What are you doing to rebuild trust among donors?

In January, the Commissioner-General decided that because of the constant attacks on UNRWA’s reputation, we needed an independent review of our neutrality framework. A few days later, the allegations surfaced. As a result, many people portrayed the independent review as a response to the allegations, but that wasn’t the case.

Nevertheless, some member states decided to suspend their funding and presented it as a response to the allegations. However, countries such as Australia, Canada and Sweden resumed their support shortly afterwards, either because we were able to reassure them or because they realised that such a decision couldn’t be taken without evidence.

Last month the independent review was published. It was led by Catherine Colonna, the former French Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs, and conducted by some Nordic think tanks. This report confirmed that UNRWA has one of the most robust systems of neutrality among both UN and non-governmental organisations. Nevertheless, it made some 50 recommendations to improve our neutrality mechanisms and implementation, which we are implementing. As a result, other member states, such as Germany, decided to restore their funding.

Different countries need different kinds of reassurance – not just from us, but also internally. We are currently working to bring back two major donors: the UK and the USA, our largest donor. Over the years, the USA has often been a strong supporter of UNRWA, although the level of funding has fluctuated from administration to administration. Unfortunately, the US Congress has blocked all funding for UNRWA until March 2025. To put this in perspective, US contributions make up almost 90 per cent of our US$260 million shortfall.

We are dealing with a huge humanitarian crisis, and we need enormous amounts of money to alleviate its terrible effects. At the moment, we have enough funds to continue operations until the end of June.

However, we have also seen a renewed outpouring of support as the suspensions have taken place. Some existing donors, such as Ireland, Norway, Portugal and Spain, have increased their donations. These are very important symbolic gestures, but also very significant contributions to our finances. We have also had new, non-traditional donors, such as Iraq with US$25 million and Algeria with US$15 million.

Individual and private sector donors came to our aid, contributing more than US$115 million to date. A foundation in Singapore has raised US$5 million through individual and corporate donations, but the support has not only come from Islamic communities. We’ve seen all kind of examples, including an artwork auction organised by artists in Ireland that raised thousands of euros for us. This shows how strong grassroots solidarity for Palestinian refugees currently is.

How do you see the future of UNRWA?

Although UNRWA has a long history of financial challenges, we have never faced anything like this. To maintain the quality and level of our services to the Palestinian refugee community across the region, we must find ways to sustain our finances, or we’ll be forced to reduce or even cut our operations after June. This could mean reducing school days or clinic hours, which would be catastrophic.

We shouldn’t be asked to do something and then not have the funds to do it. But unfortunately, this is quite common in the UN system.

But there’s a silver lining. Because of this crisis, there is a greater awareness of what UNRWA does and why it’s important. Nobody else can do what we do on the scale that’s needed. If we were to disappear, there would still be a Palestinian refugee question that would need to be addressed. Someone would have to provide the services. The issue is who would replace us.

Legally, Israel, as the occupying state, must provide for the welfare of the population under occupation. So even if it doesn’t like us, it needs us. We’re just not replaceable. So we need sustainable funding to continue to do the work we’re mandated to do. It’s up to the international community to ensure this budgetary consistency. We hope all donors will return soon.

What else needs to be done to avert a humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza?

First, we need an immediate ceasefire. We’ve been campaigning for one since the beginning of this war, but it has to happen immediately. There is no other way to ensure people’s wellbeing. We also need a steady, sustained and predictable flow of humanitarian aid to keep people alive. Many people are on the brink of famine. They need food and water, as well as healthcare and shelter.

The next phase is recovery. People need to be able to return to their homes, which means clearing the huge amount of unexploded ordnance and rebuilding housing.

After that, we need to restore economic activity, which is the only way to get a society back on its feet. And we need to help people heal psychologically from the horrors and traumatic stress they have experienced. We need to rebuild the health sector and get children back to school.

All of this must be done, and quickly. But the first step is to secure a ceasefire now, and then we’ll be able to take the next steps.


Civic space in Palestine is rated ‘repressed’ by the CIVICUS Monitor.

Civic space in Israel is rated ‘obstructed’ by the CIVICUS Monitor.

Get in touch with UNRWA through its website or its Facebook and Instagram pages, and follow @UNRWA and @UN_JWFOWLER on Twitter.

Sign up for our newsletters

Our Newsletters

civicus logo white

CIVICUS is a global alliance that champions the power of civil society to create positive change.

brand x FacebookLogo YoutubeLogo InstagramLogo LinkedinLogo

 

Headquarters

25  Owl Street, 6th Floor

Johannesburg
South Africa
2092

Tel: +27 (0)11 833 5959


Fax: +27 (0)11 833 7997

UN Hub: New York

CIVICUS, c/o We Work

450 Lexington Ave

New York
NY
10017

United States

UN Hub: Geneva

11 Avenue de la Paix

Geneva

Switzerland
CH-1202

Tel: +41 (0)79 910 3428