Member Statements: Israeli Forces Open Fire on Palestinians Seeking Food Aid in Gaza
In response to the attacks on Palestinians in Gaza City waiting for food aid, our Members have issued statements. Click…
In response to the attacks on Palestinians in Gaza City waiting for food aid, our Members have issued statements. Click…
February 29, 2024 Tom Hart, President and CEO of InterAction, the leading alliance of non-governmental organizations and partners in the…
For almost a month, the world has been watching the unfolding situation in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory in…
InterAction released the following statement on the escalating violence in Israel and Gaza. “InterAction is horrified by the devastating loss…
Dear Secretary Blinken, As the CEO of the largest U.S.-based alliance of humanitarian and development organizations working in the region,…
Aid workers are increasingly being targeted by armed actors who seek to intimidate, coerce, or disrupt aid operations for strategic gains. In Gaza and South Sudan, in Yemen and the Central African Republic, disinformation campaigns are fueling hostility toward aid agencies. These threats not only endanger the lives of those dedicated to humanitarian action but also severely hinder access to essential aid for millions of vulnerable people in conflict-affected areas.
InterAction and 50 Member CEOs, some of whom have organizations that work in Gaza, urge President Biden to take decisive and actionable steps to alleviate the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
Gaza has evolved into one the world’s most dangerous places for humanitarians to provide aid. As of March 20, 2024, at least 196 humanitarians have been killed in Gaza since the beginning of the war.
As humanitarian organizations operating in Gaza, it is our experience that the humanitarian response in Gaza, including U.S. funded humanitarian assistance, has been consistently and arbitrarily denied, restricted, and impeded by the Israeli authorities.
Although the proposed seaport offers advantages over airdrops in terms of cost, volume, safety, and risk of diversion, it remains less effective than facilitating the entry of trucks for on-the-ground aid distribution.