Israeli Officials Want UN Aid Role in Gaza to Continue, UN Confirms

In a significant development amid the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza, Israeli officials have conveyed to the United Nations that they want the organization to continue playing a central role in delivering aid to Palestinians in the war-torn enclave. The statement, revealed by a senior UN official on condition of anonymity, comes as international scrutiny intensifies over the deteriorating situation and the complex political dynamics shaping aid access.

While the statement is not a formal policy declaration, it signals a tentative alignment between Israel and the UN on the practical need for a stable, neutral humanitarian channel—despite broader diplomatic tensions and deep-seated mistrust between the Israeli government and elements of the UN system.

Context: Aid Under Fire in Gaza

The humanitarian crisis in Gaza has reached catastrophic proportions, with more than two million Palestinians facing food insecurity, damaged infrastructure, displacement, and minimal access to healthcare. Since the escalation of the Israel-Hamas conflict, humanitarian operations have been severely disrupted, with many aid convoys delayed, rerouted, or outright blocked due to ongoing hostilities, security concerns, or political disputes.

The UN—primarily through agencies like the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), the World Food Programme (WFP), and the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)—has been the principal delivery mechanism for assistance to Gaza’s civilian population.

However, Israel has in the past accused some UN bodies, particularly UNRWA, of bias or complicity with militant groups. This has led to funding cuts, diplomatic criticism, and calls for reform. The Israeli government has also sought to tighten control over the flow of aid through designated border crossings and scrutiny mechanisms, often drawing criticism from human rights groups and the broader international community.

The Message From Israel: UN Still Needed

Despite these tensions, recent communications between senior Israeli officials and UN representatives suggest a recognition of the UN’s logistical and operational capabilities—particularly in coordinating aid at scale under challenging conditions.

“Israeli authorities have made it clear in private discussions that they want the UN to continue its role in Gaza’s humanitarian response,” said the senior UN official, who is directly involved in ongoing negotiations around aid access and delivery mechanisms. “They understand that there is no viable alternative structure currently available that has the scale, neutrality, and international legitimacy that the UN brings.”

According to the official, while there are “clear disagreements” between the parties, both sides are seeking to establish workable arrangements to avoid the collapse of aid systems, especially as famine risks increase and medical supplies dwindle.

Behind the Scenes: Quiet Cooperation

Several recent events point to quiet coordination behind the scenes. UN personnel have reportedly been granted more consistent access to key crossings such as Kerem Shalom and Rafah, although bureaucratic hurdles and intermittent closures persist. There has also been an uptick in joint security assessments to ensure safe passage for aid convoys, particularly in high-risk zones.

“We are not talking about full partnership or harmony,” said the UN official. “But there is a basic, mutual understanding that Gaza’s population cannot be left to starve or die from lack of medicine. That shared baseline is driving cooperation, however limited.”

Multiple diplomatic sources have confirmed that discussions are ongoing regarding revised monitoring protocols, which could improve Israel’s visibility over aid distribution while preserving the UN’s operational independence.

Why Israel May Want the UN to Stay Involved

Analysts suggest several reasons behind Israel’s willingness to keep the UN engaged, even if reluctantly:

1. International Legitimacy: The presence of UN agencies lends a degree of diplomatic cover, showing that Israel is cooperating with the global humanitarian system even during intense military operations.

2. Operational Capacity: The UN already has established infrastructure, personnel, and systems in place. Replacing them would take months, if not years.

3. Geopolitical Pressure: With the United States, EU, and Arab states calling for increased humanitarian access, appearing cooperative with the UN may ease international tensions and defuse criticism.

4. Security Calculations: Allowing the UN to operate under clear frameworks may be preferable to a chaotic aid vacuum that could empower non-state actors or destabilize the region further.

Challenges Ahead: Mistrust and Conditionality

Despite the shift in tone, deep mistrust remains. Israel continues to press for greater vetting of aid recipients, particularly regarding concerns that resources may fall into the hands of Hamas or other militant groups.

In response, the UN has agreed to expand third-party monitoring and improve internal oversight but maintains that humanitarian aid must remain unconditional and apolitical.

“There is always a risk of aid diversion in any conflict zone,” said a UN humanitarian coordinator. “But punishing the entire civilian population for the potential misconduct of a few is not acceptable under international law.”

UNRWA, in particular, remains a flashpoint. Following allegations (still under investigation) that some staff had links to militant activities, several donor countries temporarily paused funding. Although some have resumed support, the agency remains under tight scrutiny, and Israel has continued to advocate for its restructuring or replacement.

A Fragile Balance

The current arrangement is best described as pragmatic, not harmonious. Both sides understand the stakes—humanitarian collapse, regional instability, and political fallout. But cooperation remains fragile, contingent on continued dialogue, external pressure, and day-to-day realities on the ground.

Diplomats warn that any escalation in hostilities or political provocations could derail the fragile understanding. “There’s no formal agreement—just a shared recognition that failure is not an option,” one EU official remarked.

International Response and the Road Ahead

The UN has called for an immediate humanitarian ceasefire, alongside unfettered access to all parts of Gaza. It has also requested greater funding, noting that many programs are operating at minimal capacity due to donor fatigue and logistical challenges.

Meanwhile, aid agencies continue to struggle with damaged supply routes, fuel shortages, and limited access to displaced populations in Gaza’s north and center.

Efforts are also underway to establish a longer-term framework that could involve Egypt, Qatar, the EU, and the U.S. in a multi-lateral oversight role. But progress is slow, and aid workers warn of worsening conditions if major breakthroughs are not achieved soon.

A Delicate Lifeline

In a conflict defined by destruction and division, the tentative cooperation between Israeli authorities and the United Nations on Gaza aid offers a rare glimmer of pragmatic convergence. Whether this will hold—or expand into broader humanitarian access—remains uncertain.

What is clear is that for the more than two million people trapped in Gaza, this fragile lifeline may be the only thing standing between survival and catastrophe.