Israel to bar 37 aid groups as UK and EU warn of severe impact in Gaza

It's clear to me what Netanyahu and the knesset are doing. They have made it impossible for those aid agencies to comply with their demands.
Do they think most of us won't see through their devious ploy?

The Jerusalem Post has published a list of 24 so called compliant groups being allowed to operate in Gaza. But it must be noted that this “information” was supplied by the IDF, without any evidence to back up the decision to ban other groups.

It must be noted though that the list of 24 represent pretty small groups. The banned list represents the big hitters like MSF, Oxfam and other well known aid agencies.

WWM2- I agree with all your facts and that Israel's new requirements violate humanitarian core principles. I find it difficult to understand how anyone can support Israel's decision not to renew the operating permits of the 37 organisations listed.

Israel has not provided any substantiated evidence to support it's current stance.

This is just another way for Netanyahu and others to carry out their original plan. By severely reducing aid in Gaza they are causing more suffering and deaths.
They are determined to rid as many Palestinians from Gaza as they can get away with.
Tragically they are getting away with it. Over 71,000 dead now.

Information gleaned about “evidence” regarding banned groups

“Israel recently banned the operations of 37 international NGOs in Gaza (including groups like Doctors Without Borders, Oxfam, and the Norwegian Refugee Council) by not renewing their operating permits, citing a failure to meet new "security and transparency standards".
Lack of Evidence: Israel has alleged that some staff members of these NGOs are linked to Hamas or other militant groups. However, Israel has not provided public, credible evidence to support these broad claims, according to the NGOs themselves, senior US government officials, and an independent UN-commissioned review that specifically examined similar claims made against the UNRWA (UN Relief and Works Agency).
NGO Response: The aid organizations argue that Israel's new requirements, which include handing over the personal identification details of all local Palestinian staff, would violate core humanitarian principles of independence and neutrality and put their staff at risk.
International Reaction: A joint statement from the foreign ministers of 10 countries, including the UK, France, and Canada, condemned the ban, warning it would have a "severe impact" on the humanitarian response in Gaza, where conditions are already dire.
In summary, while the status of groups like Hamas is internationally consistent, Israel's specific claims about the links between aid organizations and "banned groups" in Gaza have been broadly disputed and not publicly substantiated with evidence to the satisfaction of the international community and independent observers.”

Oreo- It's your choice and right not to clarify your statements of truth or provide any facts to support your posts such as 11.03 "Let's get some truth into this matter....". Thank you for clarifying it is for me "and anyone else to do in their spare time".

I won’t be clarifying anything, that’s for you and anyone else to do in their spare time.
I completely understand why Israel is concerned about some charitable organisations and it’s their call to do so in my view.

Oreo 13.58: "But there aren’t any facts around which charities do what in Gaza".

I disagree. We do factually know what the 37 blocked charities do in Gaza- see my earlier posts or look at their websites etc.

Oreo- It's your choice to believe Cogat's statement as "truth" without any factual evidence as you stated in your 11.03 post, i.e. that the list of 37 blocked humanitarian agencies form only 1% of the total aid agencies currently delivering aid into Gaza.

But why do you expect humanitarian agencies to provide evidence to confirm or deny Cogat's statement instead, i.e. "in the absence of charitable agencies denying or confirming anything, than yes I will go with what they say. If all the charities stated what they sent into Gaza it would be easier to see what’s what. Other charities have complied with what the Israeli government are demanding, so why can’t the others?"

Oreo- please will you clarify which other agencies have complied with the Israeli governments new demands as you state, some of which are illegal? Why have these agencies not outlined the nature of aid they deliver into Gaza and the volume? After all the 37 blocked humanitarian agencies have made clear they have been blocked- why won't the "compliant" agencies name themselves- or Cogat name them they will not? Plus why won't the compliant agencies or Cogat outline the nature of their aid and % of overall aid delivered?

After all we do already have the list of 37 blocked agencies and we do know the nature of aid they send into Gaza- e.g. MSF supports one in 5 hospital beds in Gaza and 1 in 3 births, as I included in my 12.38 post. Are you worried at all that this life saving aid has now been blocked by Israel?

Thank you LemonJam for that great post.

Cossy

Oreo

There is no other information I can see other than Cogat, so in the absence of charitable agencies denying or confirming anything, than yes I will go with what they say.If all the charities stated what they sent into Gaza it would be easier to see what’s what.
Other charities have complied with what the Israeli government are demanding, so why can’t the others?

Whilst again, I do see your point completely, I just don’t see why or agree that other charities should “comply” If Gaza belonged to Israel I can see they might have the right to ask for many details, but Gaza isn’t and I just don’t think Israel have this right! Only my opinion of course

Thank you for a polite reply Cossy and of course we all have our own opinions on what goes on in Gaza.

Cariad, I didn't see your deleted post but if I did, can't remember why it was deleted, as in, nothing jumped out at me.
Remember that Shadows lurk on these Threads.

But there aren’t any facts around which charities do what in Gaza.

LemonJam, can't thanks you enough for your research and lengthy post.
Yes, Cossy, I just came on to do that search, so thanks.

LemonJam

Oreo 11.03: "Let’s get a bit of truth into this matter…. The organisations banned by Israel at the moment represent only about 1% of charitable donations into Gaza, the other charities who have complied with Israeli requests about their staff are all able to carry on as usual".

Oreo 11.21-"You will have to look for yourselves as to which organisations are operating in Gaza, I simply read that the 37 are around 1% of what’s going into the country.
Israel need to know the nationality of staff I expect, and many charities have complied with this already."

Let's get a bit of truth and context into your posts Oreo. You probably read it was the Israeli military body Cogat, which controls Gaza's crossings and co-ordinates aid deliveries that actually said the INGOs facing suspension "did not bring aid into Gaza throughout the current ceasefire" and added "even in the past their combined contribution amounted to only 1% of the total aid volume". However Cogat has not provided a list of the aid agencies that make up the other supposed 99% percent and no evidence to support its statement. Do you accept this Cogat statement as true is the absence of any verifiable data?

Further Isreal has stated "fewer than 15% of the INGOs providing humanitarian assistance to Gaza were found to be in violation of the new regulatory framework". 15%/1%- whcih is the accurate figure?

It should be noted that Israel has now introduced a framework to measure humanitarian agencies compliance- grounds for rejection of aid agencies in that framework includes, amongst other criteria, they must NOT - "support the prosecution of Israel security forces in foreign or international courts" and MUST share details from the EU and EU member states about their funding.

Anyone with common sense can understand that humanitarian impact is NOT measured by number of agencies percentages. The 1% figure Cogat quotes, not verified, even if true, does NOT equate to 1% VOLUME of aid SUPPORT, e.g. Medecins Sans Frontieres supports one in 5 hospital beds in Gaza and 1 in 3 births, a HUGE blow to sustaining the delivery of life saving care.

Further, 100s of aids workers have been killed over the past few years in Gaza. The agencies employees/volunteers personal data is protected by data protection laws as are the personal details of donors. Isreal now requires the agencies break the law.

What number of aid organisations Oreo are you satisfied HAVE ACTUALLY complied with Isreal's multiple new demands? Plus what volume of actual humanitarian aid or the overall volume of humanitarian aid required are you satisfied these "compliant" agencies will actually be able to deliver from today? How many hospital beds and births will the "compliant" agencies be able to support in Gaza from today- 1 January?

Thank goodness for those who are willing to put in the time and research to post objective facts, rather than subjective information from echo chambers.

Oreo

There is no other information I can see other than Cogat, so in the absence of charitable agencies denying or confirming anything, than yes I will go with what they say.If all the charities stated what they sent into Gaza it would be easier to see what’s what.
Other charities have complied with what the Israeli government are demanding, so why can’t the others?

Whilst again, I do see your point completely, I just don’t see why or agree that other charities should “comply” If Gaza belonged to Israel I can see they might have the right to ask for many details, but Gaza isn’t and I just don’t think Israel have this right! Only my opinion of course

CariadAgain
You don’t seem to understand that having a post deleted is absolutely nothing to do with having a different opinion as if it was most of f not all of the comments on here would be deleted.Think about it.
The post under your deleted one by Wyllow didn’t agree with what you said,if you noticed that, so not all on here agree with everything you wrote in that post, thankfully.Free speech up to a point.

There is no other information I can see other than Cogat, so in the absence of charitable agencies denying or confirming anything, than yes I will go with what they say.If all the charities stated what they sent into Gaza it would be easier to see what’s what.
Other charities have complied with what the Israeli government are demanding, so why can’t the others?

Cossy: 12.56 "Fabulous post, thank you.

I did briefly search for the other “99%” Couldn’t find much at all about them other than from an Israeli site!".

I've not seen any such detail anywhere and I'm not sure I entirely believe the figure Cogat quotes either. Plus we've all read about individual fundraisers or small organisations that have raised funds locally and driven aid to Gaza over the past few years.

In the absence of Israell providing a list of those 99% organisations, that sets out the nature and volume of life saving humanitarian aid each delivers, the 1% v 99% Cogat comparison figure is meaningless I would suggest. Further those 99% organisations could deliver a very small proportion of aid to Gaza from today and of a lower life saving level than those 37 blocked organisations....

Cossy

CariadAgain

I completely agree with your “freedom of speech” and long may it last.

Just for the record, I’ve on ever reported spam, never a genuine GN’s comment, much as I might disagree with them, we are all entitled to express our views/beliefs/opinions as many times as we like I have done and am also prepared to accept the rebuffs, responses and consequences

Thanks for that - I know it's not you that keeps reporting the other opinion to her own.

I'm with you on just not reporting other people - just because I disagree with them. I'd rather state I disagree with them - and why - rather than report them to try and stop the other viewpoint being put. It's a form of censorship I thoroughly disagree with to think "They've got the opposite viewpoint - report.....". I don't know if Gransnet keeps a log of regular "reporters"....but it would certainly be useful for them to be able to think "that poster has reported X 10 times, Y 20 times, A 40 times. They do seem to be prolific at reporting people they don't agree with and try not to let other people have their say".

I don't think I've even seen any spam to report - but certainly disagree strongly with the whole concept of reporting someone just for having a different viewpoint.

But - defo - I do know it's not you...

Surely it doesn’t make any kind of sense to stop aid getting into Gaza, it does feel bloody minded and cannot be tolerated surely. Are there any other examples of aid agencies being stopped from saving lives in other regions around the world?
Certainly not a good start to 2026 for Gazans.

LemonJam

Oreo 11.03: "Let’s get a bit of truth into this matter…. The organisations banned by Israel at the moment represent only about 1% of charitable donations into Gaza, the other charities who have complied with Israeli requests about their staff are all able to carry on as usual".

Oreo 11.21-"You will have to look for yourselves as to which organisations are operating in Gaza, I simply read that the 37 are around 1% of what’s going into the country.
Israel need to know the nationality of staff I expect, and many charities have complied with this already."

Let's get a bit of truth and context into your posts Oreo. You probably read it was the Israeli military body Cogat, which controls Gaza's crossings and co-ordinates aid deliveries that actually said the INGOs facing suspension "did not bring aid into Gaza throughout the current ceasefire" and added "even in the past their combined contribution amounted to only 1% of the total aid volume". However Cogat has not provided a list of the aid agencies that make up the other supposed 99% percent and no evidence to support its statement. Do you accept this Cogat statement as true is the absence of any verifiable data?

Further Isreal has stated "fewer than 15% of the INGOs providing humanitarian assistance to Gaza were found to be in violation of the new regulatory framework". 15%/1%- whcih is the accurate figure?

It should be noted that Israel has now introduced a framework to measure humanitarian agencies compliance- grounds for rejection of aid agencies in that framework includes, amongst other criteria, they must NOT - "support the prosecution of Israel security forces in foreign or international courts" and MUST share details from the EU and EU member states about their funding.

Anyone with common sense can understand that humanitarian impact is NOT measured by number of agencies percentages. The 1% figure Cogat quotes, not verified, even if true, does NOT equate to 1% VOLUME of aid SUPPORT, e.g. Medecins Sans Frontieres supports one in 5 hospital beds in Gaza and 1 in 3 births, a HUGE blow to sustaining the delivery of life saving care.

Further, 100s of aids workers have been killed over the past few years in Gaza. The agencies employees/volunteers personal data is protected by data protection laws as are the personal details of donors. Isreal now requires the agencies break the law.

What number of aid organisations Oreo are you satisfied HAVE ACTUALLY complied with Isreal's multiple new demands? Plus what volume of actual humanitarian aid or the overall volume of humanitarian aid required are you satisfied these "compliant" agencies will actually be able to deliver from today? How many hospital beds and births will the "compliant" agencies be able to support in Gaza from today- 1 January?

Fabulous post, thank you.

I did briefly search for the other “99%” Couldn’t find much at all about them other than from an Israeli site!

CabbageWars13

Doubtless wanted war criminal, Nettanyaho, will have the full backing of HRH King Donald Trump.

Both should have a one way ticket to the International Criminal Court.

Or distant shores, never to be heard of again, along with Trump!

CariadAgain

I completely agree with your “freedom of speech” and long may it last.

Just for the record, I’ve on ever reported spam, never a genuine GN’s comment, much as I might disagree with them, we are all entitled to express our views/beliefs/opinions as many times as we like I have done and am also prepared to accept the rebuffs, responses and consequences