Houthis sink two ships in one week

As the Houthis sink two ships in one week, the world shrugs

The lack of response illustrates how difficult it is to stop them by force

Listen to this story

IT WAS a short-lived surrender. Earlier this year America carried out more than 1,000 strikes against the Houthis, an Iranian-backed militia in Yemen. The group had kept up a year-long series of attacks on commercial ships in the Red Sea, ostensibly to protest against Israel’s ongoing war in Gaza. American bombing was meant to dissuade them from future mayhem. When Donald Trump unexpectedly announced a ceasefire on May 6th, he said the Houthis had agreed to just that: “They have capitulated,” the president said. “They say they will not be blowing up ships anymore.”

Exactly two months later, they blew up a ship. On July 6th Houthi gunmen boarded the Magic Seas, a bulk carrier, and rigged it with explosives (see map). The next day they attacked another vessel, the Eternity C, with naval drones and rocket-propelled grenades. It sank on July 9th. Nine of its 25 sailors are dead or missing. Six others were probably kidnapped by the Houthis.

The group sank just two ships in all of 2024, and none since last June. Now they have sunk two in less than a week. Yet the world’s reaction has largely been to shrug—a sign of how much the Houthis have already roiled global shipping, and how difficult it is to stop them by force.

Map: The Economist

The timing of these latest attacks was not random. The ceasefire gave the Houthis two months to regroup. They largely sat on the sidelines during last month’s war between Israel and Iran. With that conflict over, America is pruning its forces in the region: it has already withdrawn several guided-missile destroyers, which helped to shield commercial ships.

This was an opportune moment for the Houthis to remind everyone that they can still menace the Red Sea. A show of solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza remains a useful distraction from Yemen’s own problems—even though targeted ships often have only a tenuous connection to Israel.

Neither the Magic Seas nor the Eternity C had made a recent stop there. The former was hauling fertiliser and steel from China to Turkey; the latter had just finished a humanitarian delivery for the World Food Programme in Somalia. But their owners (two Greek firms) operate other ships that continue to call at Israeli ports. Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, the group’s leader, said in a televised speech that more such attacks were coming.

That will scare off the Western firms that had begun to contemplate a return to the Red Sea. A total of 244 commercial ships passed through the waterway between July 7th and July 13th. That is up slightly from 232 the week before, according to Lloyd’s List, a shipping journal. But it is around 50% lower than an average week in the summer of 2023, before the Houthis started their attacks.

America has not done much, beyond a few chiding statements. Officials in the region believe Mr Trump is unlikely to order more attacks on the Houthis unless they fire at American vessels, and there are not many of those about. Israel has kept up occasional air strikes on Yemen, but they are too sporadic to have much effect.

Both countries are learning what Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates did a decade ago: the Houthis are hard to uproot. American strikes destroyed some of their arsenal, but they still have ample smuggling routes from Iran, which delivers either by sea or overland through Oman.

On July 16th the National Resistance Forces, a coalition of anti-Houthi militias, announced that they had seized 750 tonnes of arms bound for the group. It was an impressive effort—but also a reminder of how much slips through unnoticed. As long as the Houthis have a stockpile of weapons and the will to use them, they can continue to cause chaos in the Red Sea. ■

செம்மணி: கொழும்பில் ஆதரவுப் போராட்டம்

 

செம்மணி படுகொலைக்கு எதிர்ப்பு தெரிவித்து கொழும்பு புகையிரத நிலையத்திற்கு முன்பாக போராட்டமொன்று முன்னெடுக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது.

பதிவு மதுரி Thursday, July 17, 2025 

'படுகொலைக்கு எதிராக எழுச்சி கொள்வோம்' எனும் தொனிப் பொருளில் நீதிக்கான மக்கள் சக்தி அமைப்பினரால் இந்த போராட்டம் ஏற்பாடு செய்யப்பட்டுள்ளது. 

போராட்டத்தில் கலந்துகொண்டோர்,'புத்த தேசமா? புதைகுழிகள் தேசமா?, செம்மணயில் எலும்புகளாக எம்மவர்கள், சர்வதேசமே தமிழர்களை ஏமாற்றாதே..!, யுத்த குற்றத்தின் சாட்சி செம்மணி, வட கிழக்கில் நில ஆக்கிரமிப்பை நிறுத்து' போன்ற பதாதைகளை ஏந்தி போராட்டத்தில் ஈடுபட்டனர். 

குறித்த போராட்டத்தில் நாடாளுமன்ற உறுப்பினர் மனோகணேசன்,   சமூக நீதிக்கான செயற்பாட்டாளரும், அரசியல் கைதிகளை விடுதலை  செய்வதற்கான தேசிய அமைப்பின் இணைப்பாளருமான அருட்தந்தை மா.சத்திவேல், சிவில் சங்க உறுப்பினர்கள், ஆசிரியர் சங்கத்தின் செயலாளர் ஜோசப் ஸ்டாலின் மற்றும் பொதுமக்கள் என பலர் கலந்துக்கொண்டு தமது ஆதரவை தெரிவித்துள்ளனர். 

இதன்போது போராட்டகாரர்கள், பேரணியாக முன்னோக்கி நகர்த்த முற்பட்ட வேளை, பொலிஸாருக்கும் போராட்டக்காரர்களுக்குமிடையில் வாய்த்தர்க்கம் ஏற்பட்டு அமைதியின்மை ஏற்பட்டுள்ளது.

தற்போது போராட்டக்களத்தில் கலகம் அடக்கும் பொலிஸார் குவிக்கப்பட்டுள்ளனர். 

இதேவேளை  தமது போராட்டம் குறித்து தெரிவித்துள்ள  நீதிக்கான மக்கள் சக்தி அமைப்பினர் 1990 இன் பின்னர் வடக்கிலும் தெற்கிலுமாக புதைகுழிகள் கண்டுபிடிக்கப்பட்டனஇ துரையப்பா விளையாட்டரங்கு மிருசுவில் மன்னார் சாதொச கட்டிட தொகுதி  மாத்தளை  போன்ற இடங்களிலும் மனித புதைகுழிகள் கண்டுபிடிக்கப்பட்டன.

ஆனால் அவற்றை தேடுவதிலோ அதற்கான நீதியை நிலைநாட்டுவதற்காக  எந்த ஆட்சியாளரும் துணியவில்லை  பட்டலந்த வதை முகாம் சலசலப்பை ஏற்படுத்திய போதிலும் தற்போது இது குறித்து மௌனமே நிலவுகின்றது என தெரிவித்துள்ளனர்.

அரசபயங்கரவாதத்தின் கோரப்பிடிக்குள்  1971-1988-89  காலப்பகுதியில்  சிக்கி கொடுமைகளை  அனுபவித்த மக்க  விடுதலை முன்னணியினர் ஆட்சியில் இருந்தாலும்  அவர்களும் கடந்த கால  ஆட்சியாளர்களை போலவே  குற்றவாளிகளை  பாதுகாக்கும் நிலையிலேயே உள்ளனர் ஆதலால்  இவர்கள் காலத்திலும் பாதிக்கப்பட்டோருக்கு  நீதி கிட்டப்போவதில்லை  என்பது திண்ணம் என தெரிவித்துள்ளனர்.

சினிக்கல் யதார்த்தவாதம் இந்தியாவை டொனால்ட் டிரம்பிடமிருந்து காப்பாற்றாது.

சோலி குஷ்மேன்-The Economist

சினிக்கல் யதார்த்தவாதம் இந்தியாவை டொனால்ட் டிரம்பிடமிருந்து காப்பாற்றாது.

அமெரிக்கா, சீனா, மற்றும் ரஷ்யாவை சமநிலைப்படுத்துவதன் மூலம் இந்தியா அற்புதமாகச் செயல்பட்டுள்ளது. அது நீடிக்க முடியுமா?

The Economist ஜூலை 15, 2025

இந்தியாவின் அரசியல் மற்றும் வணிக உயரடுக்குகளை சமநிலையிலிருந்து தகர்ப்பது கடினம் , ஆனால் ஜனாதிபதி டொனால்ட் டிரம்ப் அதைச் சமாளித்து வருகிறார். டெல்லியின் புத்தக வரிசையான படிப்புகளிலும், மும்பையின் கண்ணாடி சுவர் கொண்ட கார்ப்பரேட் கோபுரங்களிலும், பிரபுக்கள் தலைச்சுற்றலால் பாதிக்கப்பட்டுள்ளனர். பொதுவாக, இந்திய இராஜதந்திரிகளும் மூலோபாயவாதிகளும் அதிர்ச்சியடையாமல் இருப்பதிலும், ஒரு பொல்லாத உலகம் அவர்கள் மீது என்ன வீசினாலும் அமைதியாக பரிவர்த்தனை செய்வதிலும் பெருமை கொள்கிறார்கள். ஆனால் திரு. டிரம்ப் மீண்டும் பதவிக்கு வந்ததிலிருந்து, உயரடுக்குகள் அலட்சியமாகிவிட்டனர்.

குறிப்பாக, நன்கு இணைக்கப்பட்ட இந்தியர்கள் மே மாதத்தில் பாகிஸ்தானுடன் நான்கு நாள் மோதலுக்குப் பிறகு நிச்சயமற்ற மனநிலையை விவரிக்கிறார்கள். இந்திய ஜெட் விமானங்கள் சுட்டு வீழ்த்தப்பட்டதையும், பாகிஸ்தான் இந்திய ஏவுகணைகளால் தாக்கப்பட்டதையும் கண்ட அந்தச் சண்டை, காஷ்மீரில் இந்திய சுற்றுலாப் பயணிகள் மீது நடத்தப்பட்ட ஒரு கொலைகாரத் தாக்குதலால் தூண்டப்பட்டது, இதற்கு பாகிஸ்தானின் பாதுகாப்பு சேவைகளால் ஆதரிக்கப்படும் இஸ்லாமிய பயங்கரவாதிகள் தான் காரணம் என்று இந்தியா குற்றம் சாட்டுகிறது.

இந்தியா அடிக்கடி பாகிஸ்தானுடன் சண்டையிட்டுள்ளது. இந்த முறை, இந்தியாவின் அண்டை வீட்டாருடன் மத்தியஸ்தம் செய்ய வெளியாட்கள் முன்வருவது குறித்து நீண்ட காலமாக உணர்திறன் கொண்டிருந்த உயரடுக்கினரை அதிர்ச்சிக்குள்ளாக்கியது, போரின் முடிவுக்கு திரு. டிரம்ப் எவ்வாறு பெருமை சேர்த்தார் என்பதுதான். அமெரிக்காவுடனான இரு நாடுகளின் வர்த்தக உறவுகளை அச்சுறுத்துவதன் மூலம், இந்தியாவையும் பாகிஸ்தானையும் சமாதானம் செய்ய கட்டாயப்படுத்தியதாக அவர் கூறினார். இன்னும் மோசமாக, தான் இல்லாமல், மோதல் அணு ஆயுதமாக மாறியிருக்கலாம் என்று திரு. டிரம்ப் பெருமையாகக் கூறினார். இந்தியாவும் பாகிஸ்தானும் கட்டமைக்கும் அணு ஆயுதக் கிடங்குகள், விரிவாக்கத்தின் விலையை நினைத்துப் பார்க்க முடியாத அளவுக்கு மோசமாக்குகின்றன என்பது இந்தியாவின் கருத்து.

பின்னர், மோதல் நடந்த சில வாரங்களுக்குப் பிறகு, திரு. டிரம்ப், பாகிஸ்தானின் இராணுவத் தளபதி ஃபீல்ட் மார்ஷல் அசிம் முனிரை வெள்ளை மாளிகையில் மதிய உணவிற்கு வரவேற்றார் . இந்தியா அவரை ஒரு கடுமையான சித்தாந்தவாதி என்று கருதுகிறது. பாகிஸ்தானை பெயரளவில் நடத்தும் சிவில் அரசாங்க உறுப்பினர்கள் இல்லாமல், திரு. டிரம்பை அவர் தனியாக சந்தித்தார். ஈரான் மற்றும் பிற அரசு விவகாரங்கள், அத்துடன் பாகிஸ்தான் நலன்கள் திரு. டிரம்பின் உள் வட்டத்தில் புள்ளிவிவரங்களை வழங்குகின்றன என்ற கிரிப்டோகரன்சி ஒப்பந்தங்கள் குறித்தும் இருவரும் விவாதித்தனர். மோதலின் போது சீனா பாகிஸ்தானுக்கு வழங்கிய உதவி குறித்து திரு. டிரம்ப் எந்த பொது கவலையும் தெரிவிக்கவில்லை என்பது இந்தியர்களுக்கு ஜீரணிக்க கடினமாக இருந்தது, (டெல்லியில் உள்ளவர்கள் என்று கூறுகிறார்கள்) நிகழ்நேர உளவுத்துறை பாகிஸ்தானை இந்திய இராணுவ சொத்துக்களை குறிவைக்க அனுமதித்தது, தனிப்பட்ட ஏவுகணை ஏவுகணைகள் வரை.

அமெரிக்காவும் சீனாவும் பல ஆண்டுகளாக நீடிக்கும் ஒரு சித்தாந்த மற்றும் பொருளாதாரப் போட்டியில் சிக்கிக் கொள்கின்றன என்ற கருத்தை இந்திய வெளியுறவுக் கொள்கை ஒரு தசாப்தத்திற்கும் மேலாக அதிக அளவில் வலியுறுத்தியுள்ளது. அந்தச் சூழலில், ஆசியாவில் சீனாவுக்கு எதிரான ஒரு தவிர்க்க முடியாத பாதுகாப்புப் பாதுகாப்பாக அமெரிக்காவை எதிர்த்துப் போராடுவதற்கான வாய்ப்பை இந்தியா கண்டது.

சீனாவும், அதன் எழுச்சியைக் கட்டுப்படுத்த வேண்டிய அவசியமும் திரு. டிரம்பை அவரது இரண்டாவது பதவிக்காலத்தில் எவ்வளவு அதிகமாகப் பாதிக்கிறது என்பது இப்போது இந்திய உயரடுக்கினருக்குத் தெரியவில்லை. இந்தியா "மிகவும் கடினமான இடத்தில் தன்னைக் காண்கிறது" என்று டெல்லியில் ஒரு கொள்கை வகை கூறுகிறது. அவர் கூறுகையில், இந்தியாவை விட ஐந்து மடங்கு பெரிய பொருளாதாரத்தையும், மிகவும் வலுவான ஆயுதப் படைகளையும் கொண்ட நாடான சீனாவை எதிர்கொள்வதிலும் சவால் செய்வதிலும் அவரது நாடு உண்மையில் பெரிய ஆபத்துக்களை எடுக்க விரும்பவில்லை. மாறாக, சீனாவிற்கு எதிராக "இந்தியா பின்னுக்குத் தள்ளக்கூடும் என்ற அமெரிக்க கற்பனைகளைத் தூண்டுவதில்" அது மகிழ்ச்சியடைந்தது.

சீனாவை எதிர்கொள்ள இந்தியா விருப்பம் தெரிவித்தது அமெரிக்காவின் கற்பனையின் ஒரு பகுதியாக இருந்தாலும், அது எப்படியும் பலனளித்தது. 2020 ஆம் ஆண்டு முதல் டிரம்ப் நிர்வாகத்தின் போது, சீன மற்றும் இந்திய துருப்புக்கள் தங்கள் இமயமலை எல்லையில் மோதியபோது, "அமெரிக்கர்கள் இந்தியாவுக்கு மிகவும் தாராள மனப்பான்மையுடன் இருந்தனர்", நிகழ்நேர புவிசார் உளவுத்துறையை வழங்கினர் என்று ஒரு ஆய்வாளர் கூறுகிறார். ஜோ பைடன் காலத்தில், உலகின் மிகப்பெரிய ஜனநாயக நாடாக இந்தியா வாஷிங்டனில் கொண்டாடப்பட்டது. அமெரிக்கா, ஆஸ்திரேலியா, இந்தியா மற்றும் ஜப்பானை ஒன்றிணைக்கும் குவாட் போன்ற குழுக்களை வலுப்படுத்தும் நம்பிக்கையில், உக்ரைன் படையெடுப்பிற்குப் பிறகு இந்தியா ஏராளமான ரஷ்ய எண்ணெயை வாங்குவதை அதிகாரிகள் அமைதியாக பொறுத்துக்கொண்டனர். அத்தகைய வெகுமதிகளை இப்போது சம்பாதிப்பது கடினம். ஜூலை 14 ஆம் தேதி, ஜனாதிபதி விளாடிமிர் புடின் உக்ரைனில் தனது போரை 50 நாட்களுக்குள் முடிவுக்குக் கொண்டுவராவிட்டால், அனைத்து ரஷ்ய வர்த்தக கூட்டாளிகளையும் கடுமையான இரண்டாம் நிலைத் தடைகளுடன் திரு டிரம்ப் அச்சுறுத்தியதாகத் தெரிகிறது - அவர் அதை அர்த்தப்படுத்துகிறாரா என்பது யாருக்கும் தெரியாது.

இதற்கிடையில், இந்தியாவின் கொல்லைப்புறத்தில் சீனா மேலும் மேலும் தீவிரமாக வளர்ந்து வருகிறது. சீனா நேபாளத்தின் உள்நாட்டு அரசியலில் தலையிடுவதையோ அல்லது இலங்கையில் ஒரு பக்கத்தை எடுத்துக்கொள்வதையோ 15 ஆண்டுகளுக்கு முன்பு நினைத்துப் பார்க்க முடியாத வழிகளில் விவரித்ததாக மூத்த இந்திய இராஜதந்திரிகள் விவரிக்கின்றனர். சீனாவின் இத்தகைய ஆணவம் வாஷிங்டனில் உள்ள தொழில் அதிகாரிகளுக்கு எச்சரிக்கையை ஏற்படுத்துவதாக இந்திய தூதர்கள் தெரிவிக்கின்றனர். தங்கள் பங்கிற்கு, இந்திய வணிகத் தலைவர்கள் அமெரிக்க பாதுகாப்பு நிறுவனங்களுடனான உறவுகளை ஆழப்படுத்துவதாகவும், இந்தியாவிற்கும் மேற்கத்திய நாடுகளுக்கும் இடையிலான ஒத்துழைப்பு பெருகும் என்றும் கணித்துள்ளனர்.

இருப்பினும், திரு. டிரம்ப் என்ன நினைக்கிறார் என்பது குறித்தும், அவரது அமெரிக்கா முதல் உலகக் கண்ணோட்டம் சீனாவை எதிர்கொள்வதா அல்லது அதனுடன் ஒப்பந்தங்களை முறித்துக் கொள்வதா என்பது குறித்தும் கொள்கை வகைகள் "தெரியாது" என்று உணர்கின்றன. "டிரம்ப் சீனாவைப் பற்றி மென்மையாகப் பேசக்கூடும் என்பதை நாங்கள் புரிந்துகொள்கிறோம், [அவரது] நெருப்பு மற்றும் கந்தக சகாப்தம் முடிந்துவிட்டது, எனவே நாம் கவனமாக இருக்க வேண்டும்," என்று அரசாங்கத்திற்கு நெருக்கமான வெளியுறவுக் கொள்கை சிந்தனையாளர் ஒருவர் கூறுகிறார்.

டிரம்ப் டூ: டிரம்ப் ஒன் போல அல்ல.

இந்தியா தனது நிலைப்பாட்டை மாற்றப் போவதில்லை. டெல்லியில் பெருமையுடன் பயன்படுத்தப்படும் "சினிகல் ரியலிசம்" என்ற குறியீட்டில் போட்டியிடும் சக்திகளையும் நலன்களையும் சமநிலைப்படுத்த அது இன்னும் முயற்சிக்கும். இந்தியாவும் பீதியடையவில்லை. தேசிய பாதுகாப்புக் கண்ணோட்டத்தில், திரு. டிரம்ப் ஆசியாவிலிருந்து பின்வாங்கினால், ஜப்பான் அல்லது தென் கொரியா போன்ற முறையான ஒப்பந்த நட்பு நாடுகளை விட இந்தியா சிறந்த நிலையில் உள்ளது என்று கொள்கை வகைகள் தெரிவிக்கின்றன.

இருப்பினும், இந்தியா, குறிப்பாக பொருளாதாரத் துறையில், நம்பிக்கை குறைவாக இருப்பதாக உணர்கிறது. ஆப்பிள் போன்ற நிறுவனங்களுக்கு சீனா அல்லாத உற்பத்தி செய்யும் இடத்தை வழங்குவதன் மூலம் இந்தியா செழித்துள்ளது, அமெரிக்காவின் "நட்பு விநியோக" உற்பத்திக்கான அழைப்புகளுக்கு பதிலளித்துள்ளது. ஆனால் அவரது இரண்டாவது பதவிக்காலத்தில், திரு. டிரம்ப் பெரும்பாலும் சீனா போன்ற எதிரிகளை விட அமெரிக்காவிற்கு சாதகமான வர்த்தக கூட்டாளிகளிடம் கடுமையாக நடந்து கொள்கிறார். அதே நேரத்தில், இந்தியாவின் எழுச்சி குறித்து சீனா அதிக அச்சம் கொண்டதாகத் தெரிகிறது. சமீபத்தில் இந்திய மின்னணு ஆலைகளில் உள்ள நூற்றுக்கணக்கான சீன பொறியாளர்கள் நாடு திரும்ப உத்தரவிட்டது. சீனாவில் தயாரிக்கப்பட்ட அதிநவீன இயந்திரங்கள் இந்தியாவுக்குச் செல்வதைத் தடுக்கும் செய்திகள் குறித்து இந்திய நிர்வாகிகள் கவலை தெரிவிக்கின்றனர். வணிக மற்றும் கொள்கை உயரடுக்கினரிடையே, இந்தியா சீனாவிலிருந்து விலகுவதை நோக்கமாகக் கொள்ள வேண்டுமா அல்லது பெய்ஜிங்கில் அதன் ஆட்சியாளர்களை ஏற்றுக்கொள்ள முயற்சிக்க வேண்டுமா என்பது குறித்து ஒருமித்த கருத்து இல்லை. திரு. டிரம்ப் கணிக்கக்கூடியவராக இருந்தால், அத்தகைய கணக்கீடுகள் எளிதாக இருக்கும். அவர் இல்லை என்பதால், இந்தியா துரோக தரையில் நடக்கிறது. ■

தமிழாக்கம்: கூகிள்

How the U.S.-run GHF tried to build a local network

 

This is how the U.S.-run GHF tried to build a local network of ‘aid collaborators’ in Gaza

The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation has taken over the aid system in Gaza on behalf of the Israeli army by cultivating a local network of companies and organizations to collaborate in its operations. The organizations that refused have been shut down.

By Tareq S. Hajjaj  July 10, 202 2

How the U.S.-run GHF group took over Gaza’s aid system – and used it to serve Israel’s genocide.

The Israel-backed and U.S.-run Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) has been weathering one public relations disaster after another as new information continues to expose the organization’s complicity in Israel’s plans to “concentrate” Gaza’s population in camps ahead of their forcible displacement — in keeping with Israel’s stated military goals of conquering the Strip and expelling its people. In service of these goals, the GHF has replaced the UN’s aid distribution system with what Gazans describe as “death traps,” leading Palestinians to accuse the organization of fulfilling Israeli military objectives under the guise of humanitarianism. 

In order to bolster this facade, the GHF has been actively attempting to pressure international humanitarian organizations into cooperating with the GHF and participating in its operations. The GHF has also actively attempted to form a local network of distributors run by companies known to have collaborated with the Israeli army in the past.

Speaking with several individuals and organizations approached by the Israeli army and the GHF’s local agents, Mondoweiss investigations reveal that Israel and the GHF are attempting to coerce local and international actors into cooperating with the U.S.-Israeli aid scheme. In some cases, the GHF has tasked local companies with outreach to the population to advertise its centers and handle distribution and logistics.

Advertisement

According to sources inside Gaza, the Israeli army is also pursuing a broader strategy of pressuring humanitarian organizations to either operate under the GHF framework or cease their activities altogether. The Israeli military has reportedly attempted to force international organizations to distribute their aid through GHF centers, overriding previous agreements that allowed them to operate independently. In many cases, aid shipments that entered through Israeli-controlled crossings were redirected — without the knowledge or consent of the aid organizations — to the U.S. company’s centers.

An official security source in the Gaza civil government told Mondoweiss in mid-June that Hamas possesses “reliable intelligence” confirming that the GHF has been pressuring local institutions to participate in its operations. These attempts were meant to force organizations to cooperate in a strategy of “engineering starvation and managing chaos,” the official said, which he said was part of “a politically motivated and security-driven project dressed in humanitarian garb.”

“However, these institutions, guided by their national consciousness and ethical commitment, refused to become tools for a party responsible for our people’s suffering,” he added.

But there are some organizations that have cooperated. The GHF and the Israeli army have essentially pursued two paths in dominating the humanitarian landscape in Gaza: forcing international organizations to either work with the GHF or to halt operations, and using local gangs and businesses as part of its “native” network, giving a Palestinian face to an Israeli-U.S. operation with military and political objectives. Here is how it has attempted to achieve the objective of building this network of “aid collaborators.”

The case of the al-Khozandar Company

On the night of June 11, 12 employees working for a local trading company were killed after being publicly detained by groups affiliated with Hamas’s security forces. Locals said they were from the Arrow Force, the Hamas unit tasked with hunting down looters and Israeli-backed gangs in Gaza. After being reportedly beaten and shot in the feet, the security members publicly accused the individuals of working for a company allegedly collaborating with the Israeli military. Eyewitnesses told Mondoweiss that the employees were then lynched by a crowd of people who were allegedly incited by the security members, who reportedly told the crowds that the employees were responsible for the deaths of their loved ones at GHF sites.

It later became clear that the individuals were employees of the al-Khozandar Company, a commercial firm owned by a Palestinian residing in Cairo.

The killing of the employees sparked controversy and outrage, with the victims’ families issuing a statement on June 17 demanding accountability. The statement also denied allegations that their sons were working with the Israeli-backed gang led by Yasser Abu Shabab that loots aid across Gaza, calling the accusations “false and baseless.”  

Palestinians carry food parcels distributed by Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, June 16, 2025. (Photo: Omar Ashtawy/APA Images)

The events surrounding the incident, however, reveal a more complex picture. Before the families had issued their statement, the GHF condemned the “murder of 12 of our aid workers.” In contrast, the families stated that their sons were on their first day of work for al-Khozandar, suggesting that the company was working closely with the GHF. 

The security source in the Gaza government who spoke to Mondoweiss in June identified the Mohsen al-Khozandar Trading and Transport corporation, headed by a man named Muhammad al-Khozandar, as a “morally and nationally compromised” company that “coordinates directly with suspicious foreign actors at the expense of our people’s interests.” This company, the source added, “contributes, whether knowingly or not, to the systematic killing and starvation of Palestinians.”

He asserted that “certain measures” have already been taken against the company, and that “more will follow,” including classifying the company as a “complicit entity.” 

The Khozandar company has been operating in Gaza for years. Also known as “Three Brothers,” the company specialized in bringing goods into Gaza in coordination with Israel before the war, which led Hamas to classify the company as “collaborating with the occupation,” according to the security source. The source added that, during the war, the company’s activities expanded noticeably beyond trade, raising suspicions of collaboration with the Israeli army’s military plans.

According to the Geneva Council for Rights and Liberties, Palestinian workers employed by Three Brothers have been “forced to work under conditions resembling modern slavery,” and have been forced to sort and load aid boxes under direct Israeli supervision and to “serve American mercenaries.” The workers were subject to degrading searches by Israeli soldiers, and were not paid any wages, only receiving a few cigarettes and a single daily meal as compensation, according to the Geneva Council, based on testimony it says it has verified.

Al-Khozandar began implementing the U.S.-Israeli aid distribution scheme in Rafah after it contracted with Safe Reach Solution (SRS), a military contractor that is also the parent company of the GHF and has reportedly conducted military-intelligence operations in Gaza using Israeli data. According to a Financial Times investigation, the arrangement was for SRS to provide security at the GHF centers, while the Khozandar company would run distribution, specifically at the Tal Sultan center in Rafah. 

According to local reports, al-Khozandar’s role in the aid scheme is to engage local individuals and civil society organizations to cooperate with the GHF, while the FT investigation quoted a source that said Three Brothers would be “the first interface with the population” at the distribution sites, and that the Khozandar team “was well known to the Israeli security establishment and had a long history of working with them.” 

The FT reported that SRS had approached several other prominent businessmen in Gaza to staff the centers, but that they refused to participate in the U.S.-Israeli scheme, “arguing it amounted to forced displacement of people in the enclave.”

Meanwhile, the al-Khozandar family in Gaza issued a statement in May disavowing the Mohsen Khozandar Company and condemning any activities carried out by Muhammad al-Khozandar and his brothers, who manage the firm. The statement was supported by the Contractors Union and business owners in Gaza, who described any cooperation with this scheme as a “betrayal of national unity” and demanded strict accountability for all those involved.

Local testimonies also indicate that the company’s managers from the al-Khozandar family phoned several prominent influencers and content creators in Gaza, urging them to promote the company’s aid centers and claiming they were safe and free from inspections or any violations of people’s dignity.

Palestinians carry food packages distributed by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, June 16, 2025. (Photo: Omar Ashtawy/APA Images)

Yahya Hilles, a digital creator, told Mondoweiss that a person going by the name of Noor al-Khozandar contacted him and spoke with him for over an hour, trying to convince him to encourage people to go to the GHF centers. Hilles explained that he consulted his family elders, who firmly opposed any involvement in promoting this project.

“Noor al-Khozandar kept insisting, urging me to go, film, and promote the centers, but I repeatedly asked him why he came to me specifically,” Hilles said. “He gave no clear answer. He knew that people trust me and believe what I share on social media, so he wants to drag me into this. He told me there would be no soldiers or Americans, and that I would just carry aid and return home.” 

“I knew that, even if things might go smoothly the first or second time, it might later turn into a disaster,” Hilles added. “In that case, I would be responsible before my people, so I categorically refused. I told him clearly: this issue is bigger than one person, with serious security and political implications. It cannot be handled through a simple call from one person to another.”

Israeli army attempts to strong-arm international organizations

Rahma Worldwide is among the most active humanitarian organizations in Gaza since the war began, although it has been operating in the territory since 2017. During the war, it became notably involved in facilitating the entry of medical delegations and volunteers to Gaza hospitals, where they provided services for a limited time before leaving the territory.

The organization has an extensive history in humanitarian relief. Recently, however, the Israeli military attempted to coerce Rahma Worldwide into operating under the umbrella of the GHF. In late May, the organization’s director, Dr. Shadi Zaza, told Mondoweiss that Rahma Worldwide rejected the collaboration.

Zaza stated that the organization operates in Gaza as part of a group that includes several humanitarian institutions, including some affiliated with the UN. He said that the Israeli army had informed them of the addition of a new institution — the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation — to this group, and later announced changes to the aid distribution plan, including designating new distribution points where each organization would be required to send its staff.

“We are always on standby,” Zaza said. “We’re ready anytime we’re permitted to bring in aid. Our goods are prepared and waiting at the crossings.” He noted that Rahma Worldwide had received permission the previous month to deliver four trucks carrying 4,000 food parcels, only to be surprised by an Israeli army order to transfer the aid to distribution points managed by the GHF, along with a demand that Rahma staff help with distribution there.

“We categorically refused this request,” Zaza stated. “Our agreement with the army was clear — we would distribute our parcels at locations designated for our organization, not those belonging to any other.”

Despite Rahma Worldwide’s request that the parcels be redirected to their own sites, the army insisted on sending them to the GHF-run facilities. The army also declared that GHF was now the sole authority responsible for aid distribution in Gaza.

Accordingly, the 4,000 parcels were transferred to Rafah, and the army contacted Rahma’s team, urging them to assist with distribution. But the team reached out to the organization’s U.S. headquarters, which unequivocally rejected involvement with the GHF.

“We will not be part of this mechanism. We reject it entirely,” said Zaza, highlighting that the army continues to pressure aid groups, especially those importing goods from Egypt, Jordan, or even the West Bank, insisting that all items be sourced from within Israel.

As a final request, Rahma Worldwide asked for its logos to be removed from the food boxes that were to be distributed at the GHF’s sites to avoid appearing as a participant or collaborator in the distribution scheme. This, Zaza said, reflects the organization’s firm opposition to the scheme.

According to the organization, some of the logos were removed, but boxes bearing the Rahma logo were nonetheless distributed at locations affiliated with the GHF on at least one occasion, which the organization said was beyond its control.

Palestinian aid-seekers carrying Rahma Worldwide aid boxes from an aid distribution site run by the U.S.-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, in Rafah, southern Gaza, May 27, 2025. The boxes were distributed at the GHF site without the knowledge or consent of Rahmah Worldwide, according to the organization’s Director, who spoke to Mondoweiss. (Photo: Ahmed Ibrahim/APA Images)

Rahma identified these Israeli efforts early on as attempts to forcibly integrate them into the GHF’s network. Upon the organization’s refusal, the army imposed even more stringent conditions for aid entry.

“We have over 20,000 food parcels ready in our warehouses,” Zaza added. “But we refuse to deliver them through the American organization’s mechanism. That organization was originally just one of many working here—we had no issue with that. But now that it’s trying to monopolize aid and impose its control, that is completely unacceptable.”

This stance of refusal reflects a broader trend among humanitarian organizations in Gaza, many of which oppose the GHF for its role in facilitating Israeli military objectives. Continued pressure for these organizations to work with the GHF or leave, some warn, could lead to the withdrawal of many aid organizations from Gaza entirely, creating a severe gap in humanitarian assistance.

“If Israel continues imposing this style of control and management, we simply won’t bring in aid,” Zaza said. “Other organizations may follow our lead. This policy — though unofficial — may well be Israel’s way of clearing the field of independent organizations and turning humanitarian work into a fully controlled instrument.”

Some international humanitarian organizations have begun cutting ties with the Boston Consulting Group, the company that helped conceive and launch the GHF and had even modelled the costs of “relocating” Palestinians outside of Gaza. Save the Children recently ended a two-decade partnership with the BCG over its role in the GHF, calling the aid organization’s plan to forcibly displace Gaza’s population “utterly unacceptable.” BCG’s chief executive admitted that its involvement in the GHF was “reputationally damaging” and the result of “deliberate individual misconduct” and “missed warning signs.” 

Palestinians carry food parcels distributed by Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, June 16, 2025. (Photo: Omar Ashtawy/APA Images)

The GHF has continued to push organizations to work with it as the humanitarian situation in Gaza continues to worsen. On July 6, the GHF announced that it had met with the Country Director of the UN’s World Food Programme (WFP) to propose a plan to help it “feed the north of Gaza.” 

“Right now, nearly all their trucks are being looted,” the GHF said. “We hope they will put politics aside and accept our proposal soon so we can achieve our shared mission: getting more aid to the people of Gaza.” 

The GHF was responding to a WFP statement that the need for food in Gaza was desperate. “WFP stand ready to assist the entire population,” the WFP said. “We have the food, the capacity and the systems.” The WFP could not be reached for comment regarding whether it had agreed to work with the GHF.

In an abrupt development on Monday, July 7, the GHF announced the closure of its center in central Gaza near the Netzarim Corridor until further notice. This was followed by another announcement on Wednesday, July 9, declaring the closure of its distribution point in Khan Younis. At present, only the GHF’s distribution center in Rafah remains operational. 

These announcements come amid ongoing ceasefire negotiations between Israel and Hamas. One of Hamas’s conditions for the prospective 60-day ceasefire period is that aid distributions be handled exclusively by the United Nations and its agencies operating in Gaza, completely excluding the GHF. This condition was reportedly accepted in the ceasefire talks.

This has led local reporters to speculate that the closure of the GHF’s distribution centers indicates that an agreement regarding the ceasefire’s terms is near, with the GHF complying with Hamas’s demand by halting its operations in the Strip. Local sources say it is expected that the Rafah distribution center may also be closed in the coming days, signaling that the ceasefire might soon go into effect.

Muhammad Eslayeh and Ahmad Jalal contributed reporting to this piece.

Israel’s Crime of Extermination, Acts of Genocide in Gaza

Summary

December 19, 2024  News Release

Israel’s Crime of Extermination, Acts of Genocide in Gaza

People pull plastic water containers down a muddy street amid destroyed buildings

Since October 2023, Israeli authorities have deliberately obstructed Palestinians’ access to the adequate amount of water required for survival in the Gaza Strip.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), a person needs between 50 and 100 liters of water per day in order to ensure that their “most basic needs are met.” In protracted emergency situations, the minimum amount of water required is 15 liters of water per person per day for drinking and washing. Yet, between October 2023 and September 2024, Israeli authorities’ actions have deprived the majority of the more than 2 million Palestinians living in Gaza of access to even that bare minimum amount of water, which has contributed to death and widespread disease.For many in Gaza, much or all of the water they have had access to is not suitable for drinking.

“If we can't find drinkable water, we drink the sea water,” one father displaced to a school in Rafah told Human Rights Watch in December 2023. “It happened to me many times when I had to drink the sea water. You don’t understand how much we are suffering.”

BCG modelled plan to ‘relocate’ Palestinians

BCG modelled plan to ‘relocate’ Palestinians from Gaza

BCG modelled plan to ‘relocate’ Palestinians from Gaza Consulting firm had multimillion-dollar role in contentious new aid scheme for shattered enclave © FT montage; AFP/Getty Images

 Stephen Foley in New York FT 04-07-2025

Boston Consulting Group modelled the costs of “relocating” Palestinians from Gaza and entered into a multimillion-dollar contract to help launch an aid scheme for the shattered enclave, a Financial Times investigation has found. 

 The consulting firm helped establish the Israel- and US-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation and supported a related security company but then disavowed the project, which has been marred by the deaths of hundreds of Palestinians, and fired two partners last month. 

 BCG’s role was more extensive than it has publicly described, according to people familiar with the project, stretching over seven months, covering more than $4mn of contracted work and involving internal discussion at senior levels of the firm. 

 More than a dozen BCG staff worked directly on the evolving project — codenamed “Aurora” — between October and late May. Senior figures at BCG discussed the initiative, including the firm’s chief risk officer and the head of its social impact practice. 

 The BCG team also built a financial model for the post war reconstruction of Gaza, which included cost estimates for relocating hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from the strip and the economic impact of such a mass displacement. One scenario estimated more than 500,000 Gazans would leave the enclave with “relocation packages” worth $9,000 per person, or around $5bn in total. 

 BCG said the senior figures were repeatedly misled on the scope of the work by the partners running the project. Referring to the work on post war Gaza, BCG said: “The lead partner was categorically told no, and he violated this directive. We disavow this work.” 

GHF operates four distribution sites in Gaza that break with traditional humanitarian models. The militarised system is staffed by US private security contractors and guarded by Israeli forces, which Israel argues is needed to prevent aid from reaching Hamas. The US last week announced $30mn for the effort, whose funding to date has been shrouded in secrecy. 

Palestinians at an aid distribution point set up by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation near Nuseirat refugee camp © Eyad Baba/AFP/Getty Images 

The UN has described GHF as a “fig leaf” for Israeli war aims and humanitarian groups refused to co-operate with it. Since GHF’s chaotic launch in May, Israeli forces have killed more than 400 Palestinians trying to reach distant distribution sites, according to health officials in Gaza. 

Nine people familiar with BCG’s work described to the FT how one of the world’s most prestigious consulting firms became ever more deeply enmeshed in a scheme championed by the White House but condemned internationally. 

BCG has previously said little about the scale of its involvement. It has described the work as having begun as a pro bono project in October 2024 “to help establish an aid organisation intended to operate alongside other relief efforts”. BCG claimed subsequent work was “unauthorised” and has sought to blame misjudgements by two senior partners from its Washington-based US defence practice. 

It told the FT: “Our ongoing investigation by an external law firm has substantiated the deep disappointment we expressed weeks ago. The full scope of these projects was not disclosed, including to senior leadership.” 

BCG added that the work carried out was “in direct violation of our policies and processes”. “We stopped the work, exited the two partners who led it, took no fees and launched an independent investigation. We are taking steps to ensure this never happens again.” 

BCG was originally engaged by Orbis, a Washington-area security contractor, to help with a feasibility study for a new aid operation, according to people familiar with the early pro bono work. 

 Orbis was preparing the study on behalf of the Tachlith Institute, an Israeli think-tank. BCG was chosen as a consultant, the people said, because of its long-standing relationship with Phil Reilly, an ex-CIA operative who worked for Orbis.

Reilly was also a part-time adviser to BCG’s defence practice where the two fired partners, military veterans Matt Schlueter and Ryan Ordway, worked. 

People injured by Israeli attacks at a GHF food distribution point © Eyad Baba/AFP/Getty Images

 Using a blueprint fleshed out by Schlueter’s team, Reilly in late 2024 founded Safe Reach Solutions, the security provider for the new aid effort. Separately, a foundation, the GHF, was set up to try to raise funding for the operation from sympathetic governments. 

BCG’s team of about half a dozen staff then turned to providing more detailed business planning for SRS and GHF. Reilly, having shifted to being a client of BCG, dropped his advisory role for the firm in December, according to people familiar with the decision and his LinkedIn profile. 

The BCG work was led by the US defence practice and staffed mainly from the Washington office. But the initial phase of work helping establish the GHF and SRS was billed to BCG’s social impact practice under the leadership of Rich Hutchinson, who allocated more than $1mn in several tranches to cover the consultants’ pro bono hours. 

What BCG called “guardrails” were agreed, which declared the project should not use consultants from the Middle East or Israel to avoid accusations of bias, according to people familiar with the decisions. 

In a pivotal decision for BCG that shows how its involvement deepened, by January internal discussions shifted to a new phase of work where the firm would be paid to help establish GHF’s operations on the ground, working out of Tel Aviv.

Hutchinson indicated his openness to budgeting funds to “match” any payments to BCG from the GHF, a common practice that allows consultants in effect to charge half price to charities. 

Palestinian children grieve next to the body of a relative © Eyad Baba/AFP/Getty Images

Rather than GHF, the contract for the paid phase of the operation ultimately came from McNally Capital, the Chicago private equity firm that owns Orbis and took an economic interest in the newly established SRS, according to people familiar with the arrangements. 

Noting the US government’s appeal for “innovative solutions”, the private equity group told the FT it was “pleased to have supported the establishment of SRS as an important step toward meeting the full scope of the humanitarian need in Gaza”. GHF says it has distributed more than 1mn boxes of aid in Gaza to date, providing more than 58mn meals. 

The ultimate sources of funding for GHF and SRS remained opaque, even to members of the BCG team. At one point, as recently as April, funding appeared to dry up and many SRS security contractors returned home from the Middle East. With its fee guaranteed by McNally, BCG stayed in Tel Aviv to continue planning work. 

A person familiar with GHF told the FT in May that it had been pledged $100mn from a nation that the person refused to name. At various points, there was speculation that the UAE or a European country might fund the GHF. 

Schlueter repeatedly told colleagues that he expected multilateral support to be forthcoming. Christoph Schweizer, BCG chief executive, wrote in a message to alumni last month that the fired partners “led us to believe the effort had broad multi-lateral support from several countries and NGOs”. 

Schlueter and Ordway did not reply to FT messages seeking comment.

 The UN has described GHF as a ‘fig leaf’ for Israeli war aims, and humanitarian groups refused to co-operate with it © Eyad Baba/AFP/Getty Images 

The initial contract signed with McNally in early March committed BCG to provide eight weeks of work to help build out SRS’s operations, with a team that included at least two consultants on the ground in Tel Aviv, for a total fee of more than $1mn. 

A new project code was entered for the work in BCG’s internal systems. Travel approvals were given by officials in BCG’s risk management operation, although it remains unclear how high up the organisation those approvals went. 

Schlueter held conversations with BCG’s chief risk officer, Adam Farber, in March, according to people familiar with the meetings. In the middle of that month, Schlueter flew from Tel Aviv to Paris for the social impact practice area meeting to discuss the work, several people said. 

In Tel Aviv, BCG’s consultants were aiding SRS in developing the business side of its operations. 

This included advising on how to move supplies to distribution sites, evaluating bids from potential construction and security contractors and providing other financial guidance. While SRS was far from a typical client, such advice was in line with BCG’s normal commercial work. 

A separate side project taken on by Schlueter’s team in April stood out as more unusual and pursued without the knowledge of senior management and in contravention of their instructions, according to BCG. 

Several Israeli backers of the GHF initiative were also working on an exercise imagining Gaza after the war and how its reconstruction could be achieved. The effort was likened by people involved to other post war blueprints developed by the Egyptian government and the Rand think-tank. 

GHF operates four distribution sites in Gaza that break with traditional humanitarian models. The militarised system is staffed by US private security contractors and guarded by Israeli forces © Eyad Baba/AFP/Getty Images 

The Israeli backers had BCG produce a complex financial model whose assumptions could be used for testing a range of scenarios, including one where large swaths of the Palestinian population were relocated out of Gaza. Two months earlier US President Donald Trump had suggested emptying the shattered strip of its 2.2mn people so it could be rebuilt as the “Riviera of the Middle East” — a plan rights groups and UN officials equated to ethnic cleansing. 

BCG’s model provided assumptions for the costs of voluntary relocations of Gazans, rebuilding civilian housing and using innovative financing models such as “tokenisation” of real estate via blockchain technology. It also allowed calculation of possible GDP outcomes from reconstruction. 

Under the scenario modelled for “voluntary relocation”, Gazans would have been given a package to leave the enclave including $5,000, subsidised rent for four years and subsidised food for a year. It assumed a quarter of Gazans would leave, and that three-quarters of those relocated would never return. 

One person with knowledge of the work said: “There is no coercive element here and the plan is not incentivising people to leave. The 25 per cent is a ‘plug number’. The people of Gaza will decide. It is not a plan to empty Gaza.” 

The model calculated relocation outside Gaza to be $23,000 cheaper, per Palestinian, than the costs of providing support to them in Gaza during reconstruction. 

The BCG team did not design the post war blueprint that it financially modelled, according to several people familiar with the exercise. But the existence of the project caused uproar when it became known internally in late May because of the risks of being associated with a plan to displace Palestinians. 

Schlueter told colleagues the work was encompassed by the existing contract with McNally and did not need new approvals, according to several people familiar with the events. 

While BCG staff continued to be motivated by the goal of providing food into an enclave cut off from aid by an Israeli blockade, opposition from the humanitarian community hardened throughout April. 

Once it became clear that NGOs would not provide aid for distribution, BCG staff began to help SRS in planning the procurement of food supplies themselves. The switch caused one team member to raise concerns that SRS was not equipped to conduct such a complex operation and that the project was deviating from humanitarian principles. 

Friction between the team member and SRS led to her being removed from the project, according to several people. 

The work for those that remained was intense. Members of the BCG team in Tel Aviv were named on BCG’s “Red Zone Report” as staff who worked more than 70 hours a week. The report is circulated widely inside the firm to call out partners who may be overworking their junior employees. 

SRS continued to be reliant enough on BCG’s business advice that McNally extended the contract for two more months in early May as the operation geared up to begin aid distribution. The private equity group’s backing provided for three more US BCG consultants in Tel Aviv and took the total fees BCG had planned to bill to around $4mn, people familiar with the matter said. 

The expansion coincided with GHF’s public launch, following Israeli cabinet approval, and the UN’s condemnation of the effort. Project Aurora quickly began to attract a higher level of scrutiny within BCG. Concerns only grew as US newspapers reported on Israel’s backing for the GHF plan. 

On May 25 the decision was taken to pull the team out of Tel Aviv, shut down the work and not to collect the money that had been invoiced. The same day, on the eve of the first distribution centre opening, GHF’s chief executive Jake Wood resigned, saying the effort was incompatible with humanitarian principles of neutrality. 

At a meeting of BCG’s most senior global partners in Vienna on May 28, Schlueter and Ordway were questioned about the work. By the time the Washington Post reported on June 3 that BCG had quit the effort — the first public disclosure of the firm’s involvement — the decision had been taken to put the two men on administrative leave. 

They were asked to resign on June 4. An external law firm, Wilmer Hale, is now helping BCG’s legal team investigate what Schweizer called the “process failures”.  

“We are acting with urgency and seriousness to learn from this and to ensure it does not happen again,” he told alumni last month. “Our ambition is and has always been to contribute to effective, multilateral and sustainable humanitarian responses. We are committed to living our values with accountability for our failures and humility in how we move forward.”🔺