Why is Israel’s Proof of UNRWA’s Links to Terrorism Not Enough?
Clear evidence exists of UNRWA employees involved in Hamas activities and UNRWA buildings used by Hamas, but some experts say that claims of bona fide organizational cooperation may be hard to prove
The UN agency for Palestinian refugees held its annual pledging conference in New York this week as the intentional community continues to grapple with how best to support Palestinians without inadvertently aiding terrorism. President of the UN General Assembly Dennis Francis called on UN member states to step up their donations, noting that only 19% of the agency’s budget is currently funded.
Francis didn’t touch on the recent accusations made against the agency, known as UNRWA, regarding employee involvement in the October 7 attacks.
“I unreservedly reiterate the demands of the international community—as expressed through the General Assembly in its Emergency Special Sessions—which include an immediate and lasting humanitarian cease-fire, adherence to international law by all parties, facilitation of immediate humanitarian access, including the lifting of restrictions placed on humanitarian actors by Israel and the unconditional and immediate release of all hostages,” Francis said in his speech.
Established in 1949 by the UN General Assembly, UNRWA was tasked with bringing essential services to Palestinian refugees in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip. In recent years, and especially since October 7, the agency has been mired in controversy. Accusations of antisemitic and anti-Israel copy in UNRWA textbooks have been widespread for decades. In early 2024, Israel accused 16 UNRWA workers of directly participating in the October 7 attacks, taking on roles ranging from handing out ammunition to kidnapping civilians. Following those allegations, 18 countries that provide funding to UNRWA suspended their donations. The UN opened an independent review to assess UNRWA’s compliance with the UN’s policy of neutrality.
One of the main organizations critical of UNRWA is UN Watch, a nonprofit organization that aims to counter antisemitic and anti-Israel bias in the UN.
UN Watch legal adviser Dina Rovner told The Media Line that the alleged involvement of UNRWA employees in the October 7 attacks is part of a wider pattern. She cited the case of Fateh Al-Sharif, who heads the UNRWA Lebanon teachers’ union and is a principal at the UNRWA Deir Yassin School in Tyre, Lebanon. According to Rovner, Al-Sharif is a key figure in Hamas in Lebanon who has attended numerous Hamas events, often appearing next to the group’s leaders.
Al-Sharif’s Facebook profile was full of praise and support for murderous Hamas terrorists and Hamas resistance by any means. He celebrated the October 7 attack and endorsed Hamas hostage-taking as a legitimate tactic.
“Al-Sharif’s Facebook profile was full of praise and support for murderous Hamas terrorists and Hamas resistance by any means,” Rovner said. “He celebrated the October 7 attack and endorsed Hamas hostage-taking as a legitimate tactic.”
It took four months for UNRWA to take action against Al-Sharif after his posts on October 7, allegedly as a result of donor pressure. His suspension led to massive protests organized by Hamas, which resulted in Al-Sharif’s reinstatement, Rovner said. She noted that a similar case had occurred in Gaza in 2017.
“The situation was so bad that UNRWA Chief Philippe Lazzarini had to travel to Beirut to negotiate with the terrorist leaders and agree to reinstate Al-Sharif to get the headquarters reopened,” Rovner said. Lazzarini denies having reinstated Al-Sharif, claiming he is still suspended and under investigation. Rovner pointed out that Al-Sharif remains employed by UNRWA despite clear evidence of his Hamas ties.
In April, the independent review of UNRWA’s neutrality, known as the Colonna report, was published. The review stated that “any involvement in a militarized group that promotes discrimination or violence, such as Hamas or Islamic Jihad, violates the principle of neutrality.”
Rovner said that UNRWA has failed to ensure neutrality among its staff or within its facilities. “As we’ve seen in Gaza, over and over again since October 7, Hamas terrorists have operated from UNRWA buildings and used them as command centers and for weapon storage, endangering innocent civilians,” she said.
This holiday season, give to:
Truth and understanding
The Media Line's intrepid correspondents are in Israel, Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Pakistan providing first-person reporting.
They all said they cover it.
We see it.
We report with just one agenda: the truth.
She called on donors to suspend donations to UNRWA until the organization removes all terrorist supporters from its staff.
UNRWA rejects the claim that breaches of neutrality amount to more than a few bad apples. “UNRWA takes seriously its responsibility to ensure that its operations and staff adhere to UN values and core humanitarian principles,” the organization explained on its website in May. “UNRWA has always taken very seriously any allegation regarding staff misconduct—including allegations of neutrality breaches. The agency takes swift action whenever any staff member is found to have acted in contravention of its regulatory framework. The range of disciplinary sanctions applied includes, often in combination, fines, suspension from duty, demotion, up to termination of employment.”
Alan Baker, retired Israeli diplomat and director of the Institute for Contemporary Affairs at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, told The Media Line that the international community is mostly unconvinced by Israeli evidence of UNRWA wrongdoing.
He suggested that calls for independent verification of Israeli military evidence are made in bad faith. “Israel is under no obligation to respond or to explain or to show any respect or acknowledgment of such critics who will never accept anything Israel says,” he said.
Hamas is able to use UN facilities for its military-terror activities knowing that the international community will immediately condemn any response by Israel.
A blanket rejection of Israeli claims emboldens Hamas, Baker said. “Hamas is able to use UN facilities for its military-terror activities knowing that the international community will immediately condemn any response by Israel,” he said.
Last month, UNRWA reported that more than half of its facilities in Gaza had been destroyed by Israeli attacks since October 7. Israel has said that many UNRWA facilities are used for Hamas military purposes.
UNRWA has acknowledged that some of its buildings have been used for military purposes but said that the agency has a protocol to prevent misuse of this sort. “Ensuring that its facilities are not utilized for any purpose other than the provision of services by UNRWA to Palestine refugees is critical for UNRWA’s operations. The agency dedicates significant resources to regularly assess its facilities, including to ensure neutrality,” the group wrote on its website.
Professor Yossi Mekelberg, an associate fellow with the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Chatham House, called for independent verification of Israeli claims against UNRWA. The mere presence of Hamas activity in UNRWA facilities doesn’t necessarily constitute a smoking gun, he told The Media Line. “There are Hamas tunnels leading to Egypt, for example. This doesn’t mean that Egypt is collaborating with it,” he said by way of comparison.
When Hamas controlled Gaza, if it wanted to take a school, they would have taken it, and there would be nothing UNRWA could have done to stop it. There might not be a doubt that UNRWA’s facilities are being used, but there is no evidence that there is organizational cooperation between this UN agency and Hamas. Those are two different questions.
“When Hamas controlled Gaza, if it wanted to take a school, they would have taken it, and there would be nothing UNRWA could have done to stop it,” he explained. “There might not be a doubt that UNRWA’s facilities are being used, but there is no evidence that there is organizational cooperation between this UN agency and Hamas. Those are two different questions.”
The involvement of around a dozen UNRWA employees on October 7 also does not mean that UNRWA as an organization cooperated with Hamas, he said.
Mekelberg called UNRWA’s mission of supporting Palestinian refugees in harsh conditions across multiple countries “an impossible task.” “When UNRWA was founded more than 75 years ago, no one expected that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would still be going on in 2024, but because of no solution, UNRWA is still there,” he said.
“No one can replace UNRWA immediately,” he said. “If there were peace and a Palestinian state, the responsibility to provide all these services would be transferred from UNRWA to this new government.”
When it was founded, UNRWA was tasked with serving about 750,000 Palestinian refugees. Today, the agency is responsible for about 5.8 million.
Critics of UNRWA often point to the ballooning number of Palestinian refugees as a sign of the agency’s ineffectiveness, noting that descendants of Palestinian refugees maintain refugee status indefinitely.
Baker, the Israeli diplomat, called UNRWA’s definition of Palestinian refugees “manipulative and aimed at prolonging the concept of refugeeism, rather than seeking to reduce it.”
The UN General Assembly periodically added to the definition of UNRWA refugees additional family members—grandchildren, nephews, etc. ad infinitum—such that the listing of UNRWA refugees increases rather than reduces.
“The UN General Assembly periodically added to the definition of UNRWA refugees additional family members—grandchildren, nephews, etc. ad infinitum—such that the listing of UNRWA refugees increases rather than reduces,” he said.
UNRWA rejects the idea that Palestinian refugees are held to a different standard than other refugees.
“There is no basis to question the reality that Palestine refugees have for generations been compelled by circumstances to retain their refugee status,” then-UNRWA spokesperson Chris Gunness wrote in 2011. “Such questions betray a lack of understanding of the international protection regime and serve only to distract from the need to address the real reasons for the protracted Palestinian refugee situation, namely the absence of a negotiated solution to the underlying political issues.”
