27/11 • GHF WITHDRAWAL

It was launched with the aim of getting food to desperate families at a time of immense suffering. It also bypassed the UN, which has traditionally been the primary coordinator and provider of humanitarian assistance in Gaza. In practice it became a symbol of something deeper: the growing erosion of core humanitarian principles in conflict environments and the cost borne by civilians when those principles are set aside.

Humanitarian agencies warn that the GHF system blurs the line between relief and military objectives, that distribution sites lacked basic protection for civilians, and that the approach lacked the impartiality and independence needed to build trust.

Events on the ground have reinforced these concerns; the simple act of being killed or injured while queuing for food indicates that something fundamental has gone wrong in the process. Humanitarian action must never expose people to further harm.

Despite its failings, the GHF also reveals how quickly humanitarian norms become bent under pressure. States, private actors and even well-meaning leaders can be tempted to pursue efficiency or control at the cost of the principles that have guided humanitarian action for decades. Neutrality and impartiality have become fragile in modern conflicts, where every action is scrutinised, politicised and shaped into competing narratives.

For the church this raises a clear and urgent question. In a world where humanitarian space is shrinking and aid is increasingly politicised, the church must hold fast to the truth that every human life has equal worth.

The church's role is to advocate as well as to care, to speak plainly when humanitarian norms are undermined, to defend the impartiality that protects the marginalised, and to challenge any use of aid as a tool of power rather than a commitment to shared humanity.