Israeli occupation authorities have announced the suspension of permits for dozens of international humanitarian organizations operating in the Gaza Strip, effective 1 January 2026. The decision follows the introduction of new registration and vetting requirements imposed on international non-governmental organizations (NGOs), including obligations to submit detailed information regarding staff members, funding sources, and internal operations. Organizations that ‘failed to comply with or renew registration’ under these requirements face suspension or revocation of their authorization to operate in Gaza.
Among the affected organizations are some of the world’s most prominent humanitarian and medical actors, including Doctors Without Borders (Médecins Sans Frontières), CARE, Oxfam affiliates, the Danish and Norwegian Refugee Councils, the International Rescue Committee, Caritas, Medical Aid for Palestinians, and several other organizations providing essential medical, shelter, water, and protection services. While Israeli occupation authorities claim that the suspended organizations account for less than 1% of total aid entering Gaza, humanitarian actors stress that the significance of these organizations lies not in aid volume alone, but in the services they provide, particularly emergency healthcare, protection of civilians, and support to a severely damaged health system.
While Israel claims that this decision of the new registration regime is necessary to prevent the alleged exploitation of humanitarian frameworks by armed groups and to ensure security and transparency in aid delivery, The suspension comes at a time when the Gaza Strip is experiencing a renewed and acute humanitarian crisis due to the following actions widely described as constituting a genocidal risk. Large parts of the territory’s infrastructure have been destroyed, more than one million people remain in urgent need of shelter, and over half of Gaza’s health facilities are only partially functioning due to shortages of medical supplies and personnel. Severe winter conditions have further exacerbated the situation, increasing the risks of exposure, disease, and preventable deaths. Humanitarian organizations have warned that restricting their operations will directly and foreseeably worsen civilian suffering.
Israel’s decision to stop international humanitarian organizations from working in the Gaza Strip is important to understand in the context of mass atrocities over the past two years. During this time, Israel has systematically destroyed the basic needs for life in Gaza, including the health system, infrastructure, water, and people’s livelihoods. In this context, humanitarian aid is not a political option or an administrative matter, but an existential necessity for a civilian population left without protection or resources.
Israeli bodies, including COGAT and the Ministry for Diaspora Affairs, have accused certain organizations of failing to cooperate with vetting procedures, including the submission of staff lists, and have alleged links between humanitarian personnel and militant groups, without publicly providing substantiated evidence. International organizations and UN bodies have categorically denied these allegations and have warned that the requirements are arbitrary, politicized, and place humanitarian staff at serious risk.
This decision comes following Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump on December 29, 2025, in Florida, during which they discussed Gaza, including reconstruction plans and potential compensation. The public statements emphasized rebuilding and support for the Gaza Strip. This contrasts with Israel’s simultaneous suspension of key international humanitarian organizations, which restricts aid delivery and undermines the capacity of actors capable of providing urgent relief. The discrepancy between political rhetoric on reconstruction and the practical limitations imposed on humanitarian work highlights a critical concern regarding the use of Gaza’s humanitarian situation as a political tool, rather than treating it as an urgent legal and humanitarian obligation.
Under international humanitarian law, Israel, as the occupying power, is obligated to ensure the welfare of the civilian population and to facilitate the rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian relief. Article 59 of the Fourth Geneva Convention requires the occupying power to permit and facilitate relief schemes when the population is inadequately supplied. At the same time, customary international humanitarian law prohibits arbitrary restrictions on humanitarian access.
International human rights law also applies, including obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, particularly the rights to life and freedom of association, as well as under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which encompasses the rights to health and an adequate standard of living. Measures that foreseeably result in the denial of essential medical care, shelter, or life-saving assistance may constitute violations of these obligations.
The imposition of registration requirements that compel humanitarian organizations to disclose sensitive personal data of staff members, in a context where aid workers have been subject to harassment, detention, and lethal attacks, raises serious protection concerns and may breach the duty to respect and protect humanitarian personnel. Moreover, the use of administrative and security measures to restrict or condition humanitarian access risks amounting to collective punishment, which is prohibited under international humanitarian law.
Moreover, the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) provisional measures delivered multiple times in the ongoing case of South Africa vs. Israel for breaching the Genocide Convention explicitly link the prevention of genocidal conditions to the obligation to facilitate humanitarian aid. Denying major relief agencies the ability to operate could be viewed as a failure to take all measures within Israel’s power to prevent conditions (such as severe deprivation of basic needs) that the ICJ has identified as falling under the Genocide Convention’s protective scope.
In October 2025, the ICJ issued a broader advisory opinion requested by the UN General Assembly, which held that Israel, as the occupying power, must agree to and facilitate relief schemes provided by the United Nations and its entities, including UNRWA, and must not create obstacles to humanitarian operations. This advisory opinion underscored that restrictions on aid delivery, such as effectively banning UNRWA, were unsubstantiated and harmful, and that Israel’s alleged security concerns did not justify obstruction of humanitarian assistance.
Accordingly, the restrictions imposed on humanitarian organizations cannot be separated from a broader pattern of evasion of international legal obligations and cannot be justified by unsubstantiated administrative or security claims. Rather, these measures amount to a continuation of policies that exacerbate the consequences of the genocide, deepen the existing humanitarian crisis, and further endanger civilian lives, warranting urgent and serious international legal accountability.
References: