Why the Israel-backed aid plan sparked chaos
Sam Hawley: This week, the Swedish campaigner Greta Thunberg turned her activism to aid when she tried to sail to Gaza. She was arrested, detained and has now been deported by the Israelis. Since Israel began allowing a limited amount of food back into Gaza, the handout has been marked by disturbing scenes, including civilians being shot dead near aid distribution sites. Today, we speak to Australian UNICEF spokesman James Elder, who's in Gaza, about why the chaos was inevitable. I'm Sam Hawley on Gadigal land in Sydney. This is ABC News Daily.
Sam Hawley: James, just explain exactly where you are and what you're doing right at the moment.
James Elder: Yeah, I'm in the southwest, a heavy night of bombardment, another heavy night. When I say bombardment, I mean 2000 pound bombs. I mean buildings shaking and I'm looking out to people in tents. A lot of artillery, machine gun fire. It's night after night, Sam.It's, I mean, that's the nights and the days, the recovery. And you have mass casualty events. I go to hospitals and of course, just focusing a lot for my own work on the on the malnutrition side of things. But that's a sort of standard day, I guess.
Sam Hawley: How do you keep yourself safe? That sounds terrifying.
James Elder: Look, Sam, it's not an exaggeration. We've said this since October 2023. No place is safe in Gaza. It's really clear. We've seen from our Australian colleague at World Central Kitchen or UN colleagues a couple of months ago, aid workers get killed here all the time. It's more aid workers have been killed here than in any other war since World War II. Absolutely nothing safe. I can't begin to explain, Sam, the level of children I've seen, the wounds to children.When the killing of children ceases to shock, as it seems to do with those with influence now, then we're no longer just witnessing this tragedy. We're complicit in it.
Sam Hawley: Israel, of course, does say that there is some disinformation that is put out there about what is going on on the ground in Gaza. There are no international journalists there, of course, because the Israelis won't let international journalists in. But what you are seeing is absolutely atrocious.
James Elder: I'm seeing the carnage of children, Sam, and this is my fifth time back. And it's very clear why are international journalists banned from here? They're banned so as not to bear witness. I've never, ever been to a conflict zone before. And I've done this for 22 years in 30, 50, 30, 40 countries where every time I go into a hospital, and I mean yesterday and the day before, I walk in. Let's take two days ago. I walked in and I saw a little boy, Abdul Rahman, who was 13. His father gave him some money to go and buy bread. He went down there. It's chaos. They're throwing boxes. There was gunfire. A tank shell was fired. Shrapnel has ripped through his body. I turn around and there's a girl who's just had another leg amputated, making it two legs amputated. I've seen more than 100 of these cases. So we're way past the credibility for false statements. We've never seen this level of attack on children. When UNICEF calls it a war on children, we don't do that for a headline. We do that because in modern history, we have never seen this level of boys and girls killed in this space of time. And it's ongoing.
Sam Hawley: James, let's discuss the distribution of aid and how that is currently happening. We know there was a three-month blockade, of course, of aid, which began in March, with Israel accusing Hamas of stealing that aid. But some aid has now been brought back in, of course.
News report: Benjamin Netanyahu saying that a basic amount of food will be allowed in because a starvation crisis would jeopardise Israel's new military offensive.
News report: Israel wants a new aid organisation with unknown funding and experience to replace the extensive distribution system in Gaza that was managed by the United Nations. That group has opened delivery sites to distribute basic food parcels.
News report: In the last few hours, reports have emerged of more Palestinians being shot dead, desperately trying to access aid.
News report: A third major shooting attack near a southern Gaza aid distribution point in as many days is fuelling deep despair amongst the Palestinian community.
News report: The UN is calling for an immediate, independent investigation into the killings. It's also saying that the current aid system is grossly inadequate and has allowed aid delivery inside Gaza to become militarised.
Sam Hawley: So, James, tell me how the aid system is working now, because all of that changed when the three-month blockade was lifted, didn't it?
James Elder: Yes, exactly. So, three months. That's important to remember. That's three months of... I mean, I'm from Goulburn, right? So, that's three months where you don't allow anything in. You don't allow a drop of food. You don't allow medicine. You don't allow a single thing to enter. This is two million people, so it's a bad example. But you allow nothing into that town or city except bombs. And that's now why we have nearly half a million people teetering on the edge of starvation. What's now happened is we have a handful of militarised sites in the south. Before this opened, the United Nations, who has done this in 100 different conflict and natural disaster settings since World War II, warned that it simply won't work and you'll have people killed. Now, unfortunately, what this is, is, yeah, it's a handful of sites in the south. Children have been killed trying to get aid from these sites. Aid, of course, is more than food. What's in this box is food. Aid is painkillers, it's antibiotics, it's obstetric kits to deliver babies, it's incubators, it's ventilators, it's hygiene pads, sanitary pads, it's wheelchairs, it's blankets, it's tents, it's fuel to keep hospitals running. It's oral rehydration salts. It's all these things. So, aid is being reduced to a box, a box in three or four distribution sites. So, if you're elderly, if you're a single mum with kids, or if you're an amputee and there's thousands of those, you have no chance, none whatsoever. This is survival of the fittest.
Sam Hawley: Yeah. So, just so I understand this, before now, for the most part, UN agencies and other aid groups have overseen the distribution of aid and there could have been up to 400 different distribution points. But now, there is one body, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, that has been set up and that is the organisation that is distributing aid.
James Elder: That's exactly right. So, during the ceasefire, when aid flowed, the United Nations had 400 distribution points across Gaza. That's critical. Humanitarian aid is about being principled and going to where people need it. Now that that has been removed, trying to be replaced by an aid system, if you will, that only gives food, there are three or four distribution sites. And there is a reason, Sam, we have to look at. It's been made clear, under the pretense of aid, this is to force people to move south. It's to try and ease international pressure. We've seen this every time there's a blockade. There's international pressure because the world's most reputable body on nutrition says we're near a famine. International pressure means they just loosen a little bit and then the international pressure and the international interest fades and it tightens again. This is to ease international pressure around starvation. But what it does is circumvents an effective system. An effective system, as I say, that has worked since World War Two and it worked very well two months ago.
Sam Hawley: So, who, just explain for me, this new body, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, who runs it? Who funds it?
James Elder: There is no clarity on who funds it. Transparency is another very key part of humanitarian aid. There's no clarity at all about who funds it. Who runs it? It's men with guns. It's militarised. It's the exact opposite of what humanitarian aid must be. So, it's 30, 20, 30 miles to walk to. So, if you're a mum with kids, if you're elderly, if you're injured, if you're sick, forget it. These militarised sites, I spoke of the little boy who now is in hospital with horrendous, horrendous wounds from the tank shell, the same hospital I met a 24-year-old, Shima, she too had tried to go to a site. She too, her family was starving. Same story, different day. She makes the long trek, gunfire, boxes of food thrown to the ground, complete removal of any dignity. In her words, quote, unquote, I saw bodies on the ground, people stepping over them, just trying to get food. She became entangled in wire. So, when we met her, that's why she was at the hospital, her leg and her arm were torn open. She tried to flee. She didn't get any food. And the system that has worked from Sudan to Yemen to Afghanistan to Ukraine is being sidelined.
Sam Hawley: All right, well, James, you're working in a war zone, of course. We can hear the birds in the background, which is incredible.
James Elder: That's very interesting you say that, because I can hear tank fire. Tank fire. That's extraordinary. It's the strangest thing, Sam. We have birds literally consistently bashing on the windows, as if they're just done, as if they're just, you know, seeking, I guess, to try and get inside. It's very, very strange.
Sam Hawley: Well, Israel, of course, does deny that it's deliberately targeting civilians at aid sites. But in some cases, the IDF has fired warning shots at people who have approached the forces. And Israel blames Hamas for some of those deaths. That is what Israel is saying.
James Elder: Yeah, and it's perilous territory for me to take on statements from a government. But it's a combat site. Humanitarian aid can't be delivered around one party to the conflict. This is why this distribution site doesn't work. It's why it's never existed anywhere else. It's why you have brave partners on the ground in the United Nations. The accountability is very clearly, it's with the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, and it is with the IDF under any sense of international humanitarian law.
Sam Hawley: Well, Israeli's Deputy Foreign Minister Sharren Haskel has defended this new system, and she's actually attacked the UN.
Sharren Haskel, Israeli deputy foreign minister: The UN is doing everything possible to fight against the GHF and the effort to deliver aid to the people of Gaza. The UN and Hamas both insist on the old model of aid distribution. And one should ask, does the UN really care about providing aid to the people in Gaza? Or is it more focused on feeding Hamas and its war machine?
Sam Hawley: And what about that claim then from Israel that Hamas has been stealing the aid?
James Elder: The evidence on aid diversion is a simple line, Sam. Just show us the proof. At no point, at no point in these 20 months have we had any precise claims from authorities, let alone evidence presented. So we face statements without evidence designed to discredit tried and tested aid systems and justify controlling and weaponising aid and displacing a population. Take UNICEF, okay? So even without the evidence, just take UNICEF, because it's not the first time we've worked in a war zone with a lack of governance. Our aid is tracked from point of registration to point of delivery. That is, you know, vaccine from getting in a truck to in a child's arm, nutritionist food from getting in a truck to in a child's mouth. We've got so many accountability systems that are built up over decades of practice in scores of conflict zones, right? From targeted distribution to children and families, door to door to malnutrition to third party monitoring. Okay, so going beyond the absence of evidence, just let's look at logic. What value to Hamas are incubators for premature babies who are dying right now because we have incubators on the wrong side of the border? Vaccines, kits for midwives?
Sam Hawley: Well, James, of course, the world is increasingly concerned by what is happening in Gaza and the images that we are seeing out of there. We've seen the likes, of course, of Greta Thunberg try to sail to Gaza. But what actually needs to happen right now in your view?
James Elder: It's as simple as it's always been. It's a ceasefire because a ceasefire ends the abhorrence of hostages here. Get those hostages home. Let's be very clear as well. When there's been ceasefires and negotiations, more than 150 hostages went home to their families. A ceasefire lets us flood the Gaza Strip with aid. It's allowing what international law says and allowing what happens in every other complex conflict zone without governance around the world. Let the United Nations, their doctors, their nurses, their logisticians, their engineers, not men with guns, not this chaos at these sites, let them do their job. But our message is very, very clear that you cannot continue to restrict and the world just cannot normalise that these restrictions on humanitarian aid are decent, are reasonable. I think the thing that really struck me, having been in many, many conflict zones, UNICEF's work is quite simple in some ways. It's you advocate that children should have access to nutrition, children should be safe and children should be in a classroom. It's pretty simple messaging. This is the first time in my career when I'm not advocating that children need all these things. I have to start by advocating that children in Gaza are in fact children. I find that so very, very troubling and that's only got harder and harder in the last 20 months.
Sam Hawley: James Elder is the global spokesman for UNICEF. He's currently based in Gaza. This episode was produced by Sydney Pead. Audio production by Adair Sheppard. Our supervising producer is David Coady. I'm Sam Hawley. Thanks for listening.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

ABC News
44 minutes ago
- ABC News
Federal politics live: Albanese jets off to G7 summit in Canada amid speculation about meeting with Trump
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is jetting off to Canada for the G7 summit where Australian officials hope he'll secure a meeting with US President Donald Trump. Follow our live coverage below.

ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Key figures respond to AUKUS review
Rachel Mealey: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is yet to secure a crucial face-to-face meeting with US President Donald Trump as he heads off today en route to Canada for the G7 summit. As he awaits confirmation of a meeting, the government is playing down the Trump administration's decision to review the AUKUS security pact. Here's political reporter Evelyn Manfield. Evelyn Manfield: It was a shot in the arm for critics of AUKUS when the US yesterday announced a 30-day review of the major defence pact. And it's news China could be welcoming too, according to Professor Gordon Flake from the Perth US-Asia Centre. Gordon Flake: China's happy to be relatively quiet and let developments in Washington DC call into question America's commitment to allies. Evelyn Manfield: While Professor Flake doesn't think the pact will fall over, if it does, he warns of dire consequences. Gordon Flake: That would be a major blow, not just to Australia, but to the United Kingdom, to the stability of the Indo-Pacific, and most importantly, I believe, it would be a major blow to the United States' credibility among allies everywhere. Evelyn Manfield: The Australian government argues a review is only natural for a new administration, but questions do remain about the US's ability to produce enough submarines to have spares to give to Australia. Although Defence Minister Richard Marles insists he's confident. Richard Marles: We need to get to that point in the early 2030s, that's the time frame, and right now we are confident that we can meet that. Evelyn Manfield: But former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull says production isn't happening quickly enough. Malcolm Turnbull: We have a submarine deal which is very likely to end up with us having no submarines, and we've got to start acknowledging that risk. Evelyn Manfield: If that is the case, there's much more to be worried about, according to Ambassador Kevin Rudd's former deputy in Washington, Paul Myler. Paul Myler: The key thing is if they can't sign off on them because they've failed, then we have bigger concerns of whether AUKUS itself fails. We have a collapse in the US submarine industrial base. Evelyn Manfield: But Mr Myler, who now heads up strategic advisory firm StratQ, doesn't think that's actually the case. Paul Myler: Addressing the workforce challenges and the supply chain integration challenges, and they seem to be turning the corner. Evelyn Manfield: Over in the United Kingdom, the other country part of the trilateral pact, Defence expert Trevor Taylor says there is concern because it raises questions about submarine development, but also the reliability of the US as a partner. Trevor Taylor: There is concern in the UK, and I'm sure we will be feeding in evidence into the inquiry through discrete channels. Evelyn Manfield: It may well be a direct channel that Australia's PM Anthony Albanese has if he secures a meeting with US President Donald Trump in coming days as he heads to Canada for the G7 summit. Rachel Mealey: Evelyn Manfield reporting.

ABC News
2 hours ago
- ABC News
Labor's productivity hopes need a bold program, not another roundtable
Former prime minister Paul Keating famously used to say the resident galah in any pet shop was talking about micro-economic policy. These days, if you encounter a pet shop with a galah, she'll be chattering about productivity. Productivity is currently the hot topic for a conversation on economic reform. Australia, like many other countries, has a serious problem with it. Our productivity hasn't significantly increased for more than a decade (apart from a temporary spike during the pandemic). Now Treasurer Jim Chalmers has named productivity as his priority for Labor's second term; assistant minister Andrew Leigh, part of the government's economic team, has had it inserted into his title; the Productivity Commission has put out 15 potential reform areas for discussion, and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has announced a roundtable to canvass the way ahead. The roundtable appears to be a prime ministerial initiative. Announcing it at the National Press Club on Tuesday, Albanese made a point of saying he had asked Chalmers to convene it. Perhaps it's a case of the prime minister emulating his forerunner Bob Hawke, with his penchant for summits, while Chalmers seeks to be a contemporary Keating, as he searches for reforms to promote. It would be a major achievement if people were able to remember the second-term Albanese government for paving the way for a significant lift in Australia's productivity. It would probably also be an economic and political miracle. Let's never knock a summit, but let's not be taken in by the suggestion that the planned August meeting, involving employers, unions and the government, will mark some breakthrough moment. Business representatives are approaching it with a degree of cynicism; they saw the 2022 jobs and skills summit as preparing the ground for the new government to meet union demands. This summit is expected to have fewer participants than the 2022 meeting, and may be briefer. Albanese described it as "a more streamlined dialogue than the jobs and skills summit, dealing with a more targeted set of issues". Chalmers will announce more details next week. We can expect the government will package a collection of initiatives at least for further work, and perhaps a few for early action. While many stakeholders give lip service to improving productivity, there are huge obstacles to actually doing so. There's perennial talk about tax reform — from business and economists, rather than the government. But serious change produces winners and losers, and having "losers" has become a political no-no, especially when there is not enough money to compensate them. The housing crisis could be eased, with more homes built faster, if there were less onerous regulations, notably at state and local level. Governments are working around the edges of this, but attempting to seriously slash regulation immediately runs into opposition from those who, variously, argue that will harm cityscapes, the environment, safety or the like. Red tape hampers big projects, but interest groups concerned about fauna, flora or the climate defend extensive hurdles and appeals processes as important for other priorities. We'd be more productive if people with skills (whether immigrants or those moving between states) faced fewer complexities in getting their credentials recognised. But critics would point to the risk of underqualified people getting through. Regulations are both barriers and protections. Whether you see particular regulations as negative or positive will depend where you are coming from. Less regulation can enhance productivity — but in certain cases the trade-off can be less protection and/or more risk. We have, for good or ill, become a more risk-averse community. Employers say various industrial relations laws and regulations restrict changes that could boost productivity. A Labor government interlocked with the union movement is going to listen to its industrial base on that one. Asked on Tuesday whether his message to business groups going to the summit was, "don't waste your breath if you're going to raise IR" Albanese said, "People are entitled to raise whatever they want to raise. But I'm a Labor prime minister." Artificial Intelligence presents great opportunities to advance productivity. But it will cost some jobs and produce dislocation. Industry Minister Tim Ayres said recently, "I will be looking in particular at how we can strengthen worker voice and agency as technology is diffused into every workplace in the Australian economy. I look forward to working with our trade union movement on all of this." Employers' ears pricked at the union reference. While the government is signalling it wants to do something meaningful on productivity, the prime minister is also highly cautious when it comes to getting ahead of what he considers to be the government's electoral mandate. Nor is he one to gamble political capital. He is not like, for example, John Howard, who before the 1996 election said he would "never ever" have a GST, then brought forward an ambitious GST package that he took to the 1998 election. That package had plenty of compensation for losers but Howard, who had a big parliamentary majority, was nearly booted out of office. Reform is more difficult than it was in the Hawke-Keating era — though it wasn't as easy then as is often portrayed now. The voters are less trusting of government, and less willing to accept the downsides of change. The voices of those wanting to say "no" to various proposed changes are greatly amplified, in a highly professionalised political milieu and ubiquitous media opportunities. In the era of the "permanent campaign", opinion polling has become so constant that politicians are always measuring their support in the moment, making a government hyper-nervous. Progress on productivity is also harder these days because the easier things have been done, and because changes in our economy — especially the growth of the care economy — mean in some sectors efficiencies are not so readily available, or measurable. We don't actually need more inquiries, or a roundtable, to come up with ideas for what could or should be done on productivity. There have been multiple reports and thousands of recommendations. What is required is for the government to devise a bold program, have the will and the skill to implement it, and the ability to sell it to the public. But that runs into the problem of not having sought permission from the voters — which forces the government back to incrementalism. Whatever the problems, it is not too fanciful to see Chalmers hanging his hat on the productivity peg in his longer-term bid to be the next Labor prime minister. We'll see how he goes. Michelle Grattan is a professorial fellow at the University of Canberra and chief political correspondent at The Conversation, where this article first appeared.