Gaza: A Crisis of Humanity

Between famine, the destruction of infrastructure and the mass displacement of civilians, the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip continues to deteriorate. Since the attacks of 7 October 2023, Gaza has been cut off from all channels of humanitarian aid. Although a partial reopening of the Strip was announced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on 19 May 2025 following diplomatic pressure, this has in fact been extremely limited and accompanied by the announcement of a so-called “territorial conquest” plan. What is the current state of humanitarian conditions in Gaza and the West Bank? What is the true meaning of the Israeli Prime Minister’s statement regarding the “reopening” of humanitarian access to Gaza? And what reactions has it provoked? Jean-François Corty, President of Médecins du Monde and associate research fellow at IRIS, provides his analysis.

What is the current assessment of the humanitarian situation in Gaza and the West Bank since the beginning of the conflict?

Today, given the context, it is no longer appropriate to speak merely of a humanitarian crisis. We are now witnessing a crisis of humanity, insofar as there is a growing body of technical evidence and legal arguments pointing to a genocide, as highlighted by Amnesty International in its April 2025 report on the human rights situation.

Virtually the entire population has been displaced over the past 18 months and is now living under siege conditions that have replaced the blockade in place for 17 years, following the atrocities of 7 October 2023. Gaza has become an open-air prison. Prior to 7 October, 500 to 600 aid trucks entered daily to meet the needs of a population living on a non-self-sufficient territory. The current siege not only restricts access but has also led to the large-scale destruction of vital infrastructure. Over the last 18 months, the healthcare system has collapsed. Hundreds of health centres and dozens of hospitals have been destroyed. Of the 36 that were functioning before 7 October, only around 10 to 15 now operate on a limited basis, suffering from severe shortages of medicine, exhausted personnel, and a lack of fuel to power generators and ensure electricity supply.

As of today, nearly 53,000 Palestinians have been killed, a figure that does not account for those trapped under the rubble or those dying from lack of access to medical care. This destruction of essential infrastructure is taking place while the siege has become total over the past two months, with no goods, commercial convoys or humanitarian aid entering the territory.

As a result, the population is now on the brink of famine. Médecins du Monde has published a report demonstrating a strong correlation between soaring malnutrition rates—especially among pregnant and breastfeeding women, and children aged six months to five years—and the effectiveness of the siege. Between July 2024 and April 2025, out of a cohort of 10,000 women and children monitored by the organisation’s medical teams, acute malnutrition rose to nearly 18% in November 2024 (up from 0.8% in 2023). This figure dropped to 2–3% during the ceasefire in early 2025, but today, malnutrition affects at least 20% of those attending Médecins du Monde health centres. Civilians are hungry and thirsty.

Acute malnutrition increases the risk of death from infections due to weakened immune systems, particularly among young children. Hunger, thirst, and the destruction of nearly 80% of infrastructure and housing are being used as weapons of war in a campaign to annihilate a trapped civilian population confined within the Gaza Strip. The situation is widely known, and Israeli authorities themselves have formally reiterated their intention to massively reinvest in Gaza for the long term.

On Monday 19 May, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced the reopening of humanitarian aid access to Gaza. Under what conditions can aid now be delivered, and how have humanitarian actors prepared for the partial reopening of the territory?

Benjamin Netanyahu has stated that some aid would be allowed into Gaza—not to meet urgent humanitarian needs amid a looming famine, but under the pretext of “diplomatic pressure.” His contempt for international humanitarian law, which has been flouted for the past 18 months or more, is clear. To date, nearly 400 aid workers and thousands of civilians have been killed. Humanitarian aid has been blocked, and injured persons remain unable to be evacuated. An estimated 100,000 injured people require care, including 20,000 in urgent need of treatment in the surrounding region.

This announcement is therefore largely symbolic. Netanyahu has reaffirmed the Israeli government’s military and political objective of reoccupying Gaza on a large scale. The 19 May statement included an order for civilians in central and southern Gaza to regroup in the western part of the Strip. That same day, fewer than ten aid trucks entered Gaza. By 23 May, it is expected that around 100 trucks per day will be allowed through the Kerem Shalom crossing—under poorly defined conditions. United Nations agencies are leading the negotiations.

In the context of this large-scale and long-term occupation, two million people are to be “concentrated” (the term used by Israeli authorities) in the south, near Rafah, although no arrangements have been made to accommodate them. Plans include four or five humanitarian hubs and logistical mechanisms for distributing food, relying on 50 to 60 trucks per day entering through the same crossing. All of this would be managed by private US mercenary companies under Israeli military supervision. The so-called Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a US-based organisation with little genuine humanitarian legitimacy, is reportedly being tasked with distributing aid.

This reflects a privatisation and militarisation of aid that completely undermines the founding principles of humanitarianism—impartiality, independence, and neutrality. It represents a wholesale rejection of the international humanitarian framework, which is deeply alarming. Moreover, it presents a grave dilemma for humanitarian actors and the UN, who risk becoming complicit in what increasingly resembles the forced deportation of two million people—a potential war crime.

Alongside this, new restrictions on the registration of international and Israeli NGOs have been announced. Organisations critical of Israeli policy may be denied registration or barred from operating altogether.

This further curtails humanitarian space and flies in the face of the democratic values to which Israel and its Western allies claim to adhere. We are not witnessing a defence of democratic principles in Gaza—or indeed in the West Bank, where since early 2025, around 50,000 people have been forcibly displaced due to large-scale demolitions, urban sieges such as in Tulkarem, and restrictions on aid operations. There is a dual dynamic of accelerated colonisation in both the West Bank and Gaza.

How does this partial reopening of Gaza fit into a broader “territorial conquest” plan? What responses have these plans and Israel’s military actions provoked internationally?

Western powers—particularly the United States and Europe—frequently invoke international humanitarian law in their handling of conflicts. This was evident in their response to the war in Ukraine, where they imposed sanctions on Russia and supported the International Criminal Court (ICC), which swiftly issued an arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin.

However, in the case of the far-right government of Benjamin Netanyahu, no concrete action has been taken to date.

The International Court of Justice highlighted the plausible risk of genocide in Gaza on three occasions in 2024. Under the 1948 Genocide Convention—adopted in the wake of the Holocaust—all signatory states are legally bound to prevent genocide. Yet, these obligations are being ignored. Some states, including France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, have shifted their tone rhetorically, stating they may adopt a tougher stance if conditions do not improve. But one might ask: what more do they need to act more decisively against the Israeli far-right government?

Such action could include suspending the EU-Israel Association Agreement or halting arms exports to the region—exports that Germany, the UK, and the US continue to authorise. France, for instance, could deny overflight rights to Netanyahu’s aircraft, particularly as he is under investigation by the ICC and France is obliged to cooperate with its proceedings.

As for Russia, China, and certain Arab states, little can be expected due to the nature of their regimes. But from Western democracies, this glaring double standard undermines the credibility of international humanitarian law, turning it from a tool of justice into one of geopolitical domination.