By Jonathan Kuttab
The United Nations Relief & Works Agency (UNRWA) is a hard working, respectable agency first created soon after the Nakba to meet the immediate needs of the Palestinian refugees who had been ethnically cleansed from Palestine in 1948. It had a unique mandate, separate from the UN High Commissioner of Refugees (UNHCR). This agency was limited to Palestinian refugees, its funding was to be raised separately from the funding of the United Nations itself, and its functions were specified to be temporary until the return of the refugees to their homes. Both Israel and the United States were very involved in and supportive of setting up this organization and keeping it separate from the UNHCR, not wanting Palestinian refugees to benefit from some of the advantages refugees received under UNHCR.
The organization runs refugee camps in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, the West Bank, and Gaza. It has three major areas of service: Education (through UNRWA schools), Health (through its clinics), and Social Services. For about 12 years, my wife Beth was the Director of Social Services for UNRWA throughout these five regions, so I have direct knowledge of the wonderful work this organization undertakes, most of whose 30,000 employees are themselves Palestinian refugees. Today, UNRWA serves about 5.7 million Palestinian refugees. In Gaza, it is the second largest employer, with 13,000 employees, 153 of whom were killed by Israel, and the agency is housing over a million people in 154 installations in which internally displaced refugees are housed.
Israel has always had an ambivalent relationship to UNRWA. It would prefer that the agency be dissolved, that the refugees be assimilated within the surrounding countries and cease dreaming entirely about the right of return to Palestine. The theory is that if there is no UNRWA, then there would be no Palestinian refugees; there would be no right of return or even an aspiration to return. Instead, refugees would merely settle in different countries. I must say that this theory relies in many respects upon deeply bigoted tropes and assumptions, like “Palestinians do not exist” and “all Arabs are the same.” The collapse of UNRWA will not lead to Palestinian assimilation, but more likely to the prolonged suffering of a multi-generational stateless minority population within neighboring countries still living in camps. Yet, particularly in the West Bank and Gaza, UNRWA has been providing invaluable services that would otherwise have been the duty of Israel to provide as an occupying power. There have been several instances where pro-Israeli US Congressmen, listening to the rhetoric coming out of Israel, attempted to defund UNRWA and cease US contributions to its operation. But, they were told quietly that it is in Israel’s interest for the agency to continue in its work.
As a result of this ambivalence, UNRWA has become accustomed to constant criticism, especially from the right wingers, calls for myriad investigations, accusations over everything from corruption and inefficiency to incitement in its educational facilities, encouragement of Palestinian nationalism, and the hope of return, etc… In each case, extensive scrutiny by donor countries showed no serious problems, but has inevitably led to strict rules and procedures, always with Israeli supporters behind the scenes insisting that UNRWA continue its valuable work, even while criticizing it publicly. It should be remembered that UNRWA needs to raise more and more funds every year directly from donor countries, as it does not receive its funding from the budget of the United Nations itself.
This is the context of the present crisis, which began the very day after the ICJ announced its decision noting the humanitarian crisis and the plausible danger of genocide arising from starvation and the establishment of conditions that make it unlivable for Gazans.
Whether to divert attention from the interim decision of the ICJ, or as part of the right wing’s long-standing desire to destroy UNRWA as a potentially hostile agency, Israel announced, with little or no proof, that 12 out of the 13,000 employees of UNRWA were involved in the attacks of October 7. Even though it received no evidence of wrongdoing, UNRWA promptly suspended the 12 employees and began an independent investigation into the allegations. Recent reports are saying that the actual number of accused employees has been revised to 6, or even 4. Yet this was not enough for Israel and its supporters, who demanded UNRWA itself be punished, possibly dismantled, and prevented from continuing its humanitarian mission. Led by the US, 17 western countries promptly announced the suspension of all contributions to UNRWA. This is so difficult to understand since UNRWA is the ONLY agency or organization with the logistical capability of distributing or managing whatever humanitarian assistance Israel will allow into Gaza.
Coming promptly after the ICJ decision, which indicated that humanitarian aid should be immediately expanded to prevent ongoing starvation, this decision is very hard to understand, particularly since none of these countries had any proof of UNRWA wrongdoing. Even if 12 employees out of 13,000 turned out to have participated in the October 7 attacks, this does not in any way implicate UNRWA itself or justify the suspension of its vital life-saving activities. The only explanation is that these countries have chosen, on the flimsiest of excuses, to participate in an action that makes them complicit in the very genocide the ICJ is warning against. It also highlights the gap between the 1% decision makers in these countries and the wishes of the overwhelming majority of their people, many of whom have marched in the streets in massive numbers demanding a ceasefire and showing care for and solidarity with the innocent Palestinians.
I hear that Norway, one of the European countries that did NOT suspend its contributions to UNRWA, just nominated UNRWA for the Nobel Peace Prize for their heroic humanitarian work. I hope they get it.