Chaotic Start to New Gaza Aid System

Chaotic Start to New Gaza Aid System

Palestinians seek aid near an aid distribution site run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, in Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip.
Palestinians seek aid near an aid distribution site run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, in Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip. Hatem Khaled/Reuters

Article by CFR.org Editors

May 28, 2025 11:00 am (EST)

Palestinians seek aid near an aid distribution site run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, in Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip.
Palestinians seek aid near an aid distribution site run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, in Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip. Hatem Khaled/Reuters
Article
Current political and economic issues succinctly explained.

Welcome to the Daily News Brief, CFR’s flagship morning newsletter summarizing the top global news and analysis of the day. 

Subscribe to the Daily News Brief to receive it every weekday morning.

Top of the Agenda

More on:

Daily News Brief

A crowd rush and Israeli shots marked the first full day of aid distribution in southern Gaza yesterday by a U.S.- and Israeli-backed group. Israel authorized the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) to give out food after international criticism of its monthslong blockade on aid, which began to ease last week. A UN official said today that around forty-seven people were injured, mostly due to gunshots, and that the organization was still gathering information about the incident. 

The new aid system. Though yesterday’s chaos briefly halted operations, GHF said it had distributed the equivalent of around 462,000 meals, enough to feed around 2 percent of Gaza’s population for half a week. The U.S. and Israeli governments celebrated its launch. But the United Nations criticized GHF as inexperienced and uncommitted to providing aid for all.

  • The GHF distribution point is located in southern Gaza, where Israel plans to push the territory’s whole population. Israel says it aims to screen aid recipients to ensure they are not connected to Hamas.
  • Humanitarian groups and the UN boycotted GHF, saying its distribution center is hard for the elderly and disabled to access, that it could promote forced displacement, and that they oppose the use of facial recognition software to vet aid recipients. A UN spokesperson yesterday called for Israel to reopen all crossings into Gaza for aid.
  • “Many more” GHF distribution sites will be set up, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said.

The war’s trajectory.

  • Israel, Hamas, and the United States have issued conflicting public statements in recent days about the ongoing ceasefire and hostage talks. Unnamed Israeli and Western officials told the New York Times that a proposal for a sixty-day truce was on the table but that Israel and Hamas disagreed over whether it should include an assurance that further talks would produce a permanent end to the war.
  • In the meantime, Israel has announced plans for a sweeping military operation to take over 75 percent of Gaza and stay indefinitely.

“Gaza is a rarity in the annals of warfare. It’s especially vulnerable for at least three reasons. It’s densely populated. There’s nowhere for anyone to escape to. And it has a long history of being reliant on outside aid, mostly from the UN. So when it is bombed and attacked over months, its residents are trapped... Here there is also very little internal system for sustenance. So when outside aid is cut off or heavily reduced, things get terrible very quickly.”

More on:

Daily News Brief

—Bloomberg’s Ethan Bronner at a CFR Meeting

Across the Globe

U.S. pause on student visa appointments. The State Department instructed overseas missions to stop scheduling new visa appointments for international students until guidance is issued on vetting applicants’ social media, according to a cable seen by Reuters. A State Department spokesperson said the United States will use “every tool” to vet people. The Trump administration has argued that some international students’ criticism of Israel’s conduct in Gaza threatens U.S. foreign policy, prompting lawsuits saying students are exercising free speech rights.

Trump’s warning to Putin. U.S. President Donald Trump wrote on social media yesterday that Russian President Vladimir Putin was “playing with fire” and that without Trump, “lots of really bad things would have already happened to Russia.” The White House and U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) have coordinated on a bill to further sanction Russia, Graham wrote yesterday in the Wall Street Journal.

Reported Israel-Syria talks. Delegations from Israel and Syria have held several rounds of direct talks in recent weeks to de-escalate tensions, multiple media outlets reported. The countries have a long history of poor relations, which worsened after Israel moved troops into Syria following the rebel takeover last December. The Israeli and Syrian foreign ministries did not immediately comment, while a Syrian official reported to have participated in the talks denied having done so.

China-Gulf-ASEAN ties. Chinese Premier Li Qiang called for Chinese, Southeast Asian, and Gulf countries to create a “big market” for trade at a meeting yesterday in Malaysia. It marks the first time China has held a joint summit with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). While no major deals were announced yesterday, Li visited ASEAN member Indonesia over the weekend and announced an agreement to partner with the country’s sovereign wealth fund.

New Delhi’s trade offer to Washington. India is offering “deep” reductions to import tariffs in trade negotiations with the United States but aims to maintain duties on agriculture products such as grains and dairy, two unnamed sources told the Financial Times. Indian and U.S. government agencies did not immediately comment. Trump has threatened 26 percent tariffs on the country and said last month that India is offering “basically no tariff.” The two sides say they seek the first pillar of a deal by the fall.

Peru climate lawsuit dismissed. A German court dismissed Peruvian farmer Saúl Luciano Lliuya’s lawsuit against German energy company RWE over purported climate damages. While the firm does not operate in Peru, it is one of the world’s biggest greenhouse gas emitters; Lliuya argued that RWE’s operations contributed to glacier melt that endangered his home. The judge said the estimate of risk to Lliuya’s home was too small to proceed with the case, but that a polluter could be held liable if damages were greater.

King Charles in Canada. The United Kingdom’s King Charles III praised Canada as “strong and free” in a speech to the Canadian parliament in Ottawa yesterday. Charles is Canada’s ceremonial head of state, as Canada is a member of the Commonwealth of Nations. His participation was seen as supporting Canada’s sovereignty after annexation threats by Trump. 

India’s scrutiny over surveillance market. Global manufacturers of security equipment have warned of supply disruptions after India debuted new requirements that their hardware, software, and source code must be tested in government labs, Reuters reported. Some of the concerns stem from Chinese participation in the sector, an unnamed Indian official said. India’s surveillance camera market is worth some $3.5 billion and is expected to grow to $7 billion by 2030, a market research firm estimated.

What’s Next

  • Today, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz hosts Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Berlin.
  • Today, Poland’s Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski begins a visit to Sri Lanka.
  • Tomorrow, the Ivory Coast-based African Development Bank will elect a new leader.
Creative Commons
Creative Commons: Some rights reserved.
Close
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License.
View License Detail
Close

Top Stories on CFR

Europe

Growing Conflict and Uncertain Alliances: On the Future of European Security
On the eighty-first anniversary of D-Day, CFR President Michael Froman and senior fellows discuss the Trump administration’s diminished appetite for engagement in European security affairs—even as the Russia-Ukraine war drags on.

by Michael Froman June 6, 2025

Ukraine

The Senate’s New Ukraine Bill Will Not Work—But Here Is How to Fix It
The Sanctioning Russia Act would impose history’s highest tariffs and tank the global economy. Congress needs a better approach, one that strengthens existing sanctions and adds new measures the current bill ignores.

by Stephen Sestanovich June 4, 2025 Wachenheim Program on Peace and Security

China Strategy Initiative

Divergence Despite Convergence: The United States-India Strategic Partnership and Defense Norms
At the Shangri-La dialogue in Singapore last week, U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said that the United States would be expanding its defense partnership with India. His statement was in line with U.S. policy over the last two decades, which, irrespective of the party in power, has sought to cultivate India as a serious defense partner. The U.S.-India defense partnership has come a long way. Beginning in 2001, the United States and India moved from little defense cooperation or coordination to significant gestures that would lay the foundation of the robust defense partnership that exists today—such as India offering access to its facilities after 9/11 to help the United States launch operations in Afghanistan or the 123 Agreement in 2005 that paved the way for civil nuclear cooperation between the two countries. In the United States, there is bipartisan agreement that a strong defense partnership with India is vital for its Indo-Pacific strategy and containing China. In India, too, there is broad political support for its strategic partnership with the United States given its immense wariness about its fractious border relationship with China. Consequently, the U.S.-India bilateral relationship has heavily emphasized security, with even trade tilting toward defense goods. Despite the massive changes to the relationship in the last few years, and both countries’ desire to develop ever-closer defense ties, differences between the United States and India remain. A significant part of this has to do with the differing norms that underpin the defense interests of each country. The following Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) memos by defense experts in three countries are part of a larger CFR project assessing India’s approach to the international order in different areas, and illustrate India’s positions on important defense issues—military operationalization, cooperation in space, and export controls—and how they differ with respect to the United States and its allies. Sameer Lalwani (Washington, DC) argues that the two countries differ in their thinking about deterrence, and that this is evident in three categories crucial to defense: capability, geography, and interoperability. When it comes to increasing material capabilities, for example, India prioritizes domestic economic development, including developing indigenous capabilities (i.e., its domestic defense-industrial sector). With regard to geography, for example, the United States and its Western allies think of crises, such as Ukraine, in terms of global domino effects; India, in contrast, thinks regionally, and confines itself to the effects on its neighborhood and borders (and, as the recent crisis with Pakistan shows, India continues to face threats on its border, widening the geographic divergence with the United States). And India’s commitment to strategic autonomy means the two countries remain far apart on the kind of interoperability required by modern military operations. Yet there is also reason for optimism about the relationship as those differences are largely surmountable. Dimitrios Stroikos (London) argues that India’s space policy has shifted from prioritizing socioeconomic development to pursuing both national security and prestige. While it is party to all five UN space treaties that govern outer space and converges with the United States on many issues in the civil, commercial, and military domains of space, India is careful with regard to some norms. It favors, for example, bilateral initiatives over multilateral, and the inclusion of Global South countries in institutions that it believes to be dominated by the West. Konark Bhandari (New Delhi) argues that India’s stance on export controls is evolving. It has signed three of the four major international export control regimes, but it has to consistently contend with the cost of complying, particularly as the United States is increasingly and unilaterally imposing export control measures both inside and outside of those regimes. When it comes to export controls, India prefers trade agreements with select nations, prizes its strategic autonomy (which includes relations with Russia and China through institutions such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the BRICS), and prioritizes its domestic development. Furthermore, given President Donald Trump’s focus on bilateral trade, the two countries’ differences will need to be worked out if future tech cooperation is to be realized.

by Manjari Chatterjee Miller June 5, 2025 China Strategy Initiative