• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
Democracy
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Mona Jebril"
  ],
  "type": "commentary",
  "blog": "Sada",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "MEP",
  "programs": [
    "Middle East"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [],
  "topics": []
}
Attribution logo

Source: Getty

Commentary
Sada

UNRWA As A Proxy Site of Conflict? The Case of the Gaza Strip

Disrupting UNRWA is a deliberate strategy to undermine Palestinians’ protracted refugee status and impose normalization. But, in the Gaza Strip, does this also mean disempowering the Hamas government?

Link Copied
By Mona Jebril
Published on May 19, 2022
Sada

Blog

Sada

Sada is an online journal rooted in Carnegie’s Middle East Program that seeks to foster and enrich debate about key political, economic, and social issues in the Arab world and provides a venue for new and established voices to deliver reflective analysis on these issues.

Learn More
Program mobile hero image

Program

Middle East

The Middle East Program in Washington combines in-depth regional knowledge with incisive comparative analysis to provide deeply informed recommendations. With expertise in the Gulf, North Africa, Iran, and Israel/Palestine, we examine crosscutting themes of political, economic, and social change in both English and Arabic.

Learn More

There has recently been growing pressure on UNRWA to close and transfer its operations to UNHCR, a move that would delegitimize the right of return for Palestinian refugees. This pressure is exercised through increased cuts to UNRWA’s budget, which are primarily based on claims regarding the agency’s institutional credibility and education programs. In the Gaza Strip, however, these financial cuts to UNRWA also appear to be a tactic to force the Hamas government into negotiating with Israel, and to weaken the group’s position ahead of prospective Palestinian elections.  

In the Gaza Strip, UNRWA is irreplaceable as it offers lifesaving services for the besieged refugee population, but the double-edged position of UNRWA has simultaneously left Palestinian refugees in a “limbo state.” For a long time, Palestinians were distrustful of UNRWA, as they perceived the agency as facilitating their resettlement rather than repatriation. Furthermore, UNRWA’s attempts at neutrality and its limited protection mandate have meant a de facto depoliticization of the Palestinian cause, transforming it into a perpetual humanitarian crisis, and subsidizing the Israeli occupation of the Gaza Strip. 

In 2020, four Arab countries—the UAE, Sudan, Morocco, and Bahrain—signed normalization agreements with Israel. Palestinians in the Gaza Strip consider these agreements—collectively termed the Abraham Accords—to be a breach of the previous historic consensus based on “land for peace.” These US-brokered normalization deals, along with the US-supported Netanyahu annexation plan, created an atmosphere of political frustration among people in Gaza. This frustration, combined with an enduring barrier to trust between Palestinians and UNRWA, means that “any change in UNRWA programs would raise. . .the bugaboo of a “liquidation plot” and contribute. . .to refugee paranoia and cynicism.” For example, UNRWA’s budget shortfall in 2020 forced the agency to defer the payment of full salaries for its employees and reduce some of its services. In response, Palestinian protestors in the Gaza Strip—including representatives of national and political committees—gathered in angry mass demonstrations in front of UNRWA’s headquarters and clinics. They demanded the restoration of usual services and held banners emblazoned with the words, “We are all refugees”— a slogan reflecting their anger towards UNRWA’s exclusion of unregistered Palestinian refugees during the Covid-19 health emergency. The protestors also carried messages of political condemnation, as they seem to have interpreted UNRWA’s reduction of services as part of a Trump administration “conspiracy” related to the broader normalization agenda. 

UNRWA at a Turning Point in its History 

With the normalization trend, a negative shift in some Arab countries’ positions towards UNRWA is evident. Calls to “fix” UNRWA are not new and have historically been rooted in a desire to delegitimize Palestinians’ right of return. Proposed reforms have included: “transferring UNRWA’s responsibilities to UNHCR,” “removing national citizens from UNRWA’s responsibility,” “limiting UNRWA’s public pronouncement,” “vetting area staff and refugees,” “moving to need-based provision of services,” “monitoring textbooks and teachers,” “rethinking ambulance services,” “refining relief and social services,” “expanding housing loans,” and “reviewing the microfinance and microenterprise program.” A more recent phenomenon, however, is the conditioning of funds to UNRWA based on monitoring the textbooks used to teach Palestinian students.

The true nature of these calls for reform was particularly evident during the previous U.S. administration; indeed, Trump’s era was considered “open season for critics of the organization.” The former president described UNRWA as "irredeemably flawed," and Jared Kushner, senior advisor to the president, called for a “sincere effort to disrupt UNRWA.” In the same exchange, Kushner also characterized the agency as “corrupt, inefficient, and unconducive to peace.” Against this backdrop, in 2018, UNRWA experienced unprecedented financial cuts by its largest single donor, the United States. To fill the funding gap, contributions from Gulf countries and the Europeans subsequently assisted UNRWA in dealing with the financial crisis caused by the Trump administration. After Biden assumed office, a portion of American funding to UNRWA (235 million USD) was restored.

Between 2018 and 2022, however, Gulf funding to UNRWA fell drastically, especially that offered by the UAE and Bahrain. Emirati donations to UNRWA totaled 20 million USD in 2018. However, two years later, Abu Dhabi’s contribution to UNRWA amounted to just 1 million USD. The UAE’s drastic cut in funding is perceived to be directly related to the Abraham Accords. The European Parliament, for the first time in its history, also decided to block 20 million EUR in aid to UNRWA if immediate changes were not made to Palestinian school textbooks. In addition, the UK has reduced its core grant to the agency by over 50 percent. In this context, the Commissioner-General of UNRWA, Philippe Lazzarini, has called for “shield[ing] the Agency from those who try to harm its reputation, integrity, and purpose.”

A Proxy Site of Conflict Against the Hamas Government?

The deliberate disruption to UNRWA’s work not only robs Palestinian refugees of the right of return, but also instrumentalizes the agency into a political pawn to disempower the Hamas government. For example, in the summer of 2021, the United States announced that it would contribute 135 million USD to UNRWA. However, receipt of this contribution was conditioned on signing a Framework for Cooperation, which states that “no part of the US contribution shall be used to furnish assistance to any refugee who is receiving military training as a member of the so-called Palestinian Liberation Army or any other guerrilla-type organization or has engaged in any act of terrorism.” The framework also stipulates a clause for “monitoring Palestinian [school] curriculum content.” Dozens of Palestinians protested the agreement, which they viewed as violating their rights, and essentially transforming UNRWA into an intelligence agency. 

Despite already being resource-constrained, the Hamas government will now be pressured to fill the service provision gap caused by UNRWA’s budget cuts. Subsequently, this dire situation could coerce the government into negotiating with Israel and possibly weaken its position in future Palestinian elections, as Palestinians will perceive the movement as incapable of addressing their basic needs. Concurrently, as UNRWA continues to struggle financially, Israel has lifted a years-long ban on work permits for Palestinians for the first time since the Hamas government’s takeover of Gaza in 2007. This effectively transforms the Gaza Strip into an economic colony—a step supporting further normalization, not peace. This sudden change could also be used to numb resistance in the Gaza Strip and continue weakening UNRWA. 

Is it Really a Problem of Textbooks? 

Contrary to the barrage of accusations from critics, UNRWA has a robust review system of textbooks “according to the values and principles of the UN.” Additionally, in 2021, UNRWA won a British Council Award for excellence in global education. Therefore, conditioning UNRWA funding on “monitoring Palestinian [school] curriculum content” is unjustifiable. As Philippe Lazzarini pointed out, “It is not UNRWA that is perpetuating refugee statehood. Refugee statehood is perpetuated by the absence of a political solution.” UNRWA students learn about the UN values of freedom and human rights in classrooms while being surrounded by the sounds of shelling and bombardment, destroyed neighborhoods, and conditions of poverty at home. This is the true challenge that UNRWA faces in pursuit of its global education mission, and this challenge should be addressed with critical priority.

However, rather than providing critical support to UNRWA during the ongoing global health crisis, cuts to UNRWA’s budget have left the agency in a danger zone, threatening the lives of the vulnerable population living in the Gaza Strip. Unless the international community acknowledges the true cost of their strategies to disrupt UNRWA—evident in the harm these policies inflict on human life and essential development—the future of new generations in the Gaza Strip will be jeopardized, and prospects for achieving a just and durable peace in the region will remain mere political rhetoric.  

Dr. Mona Jebril is a Research Associate at the University of Cambridge Centre for Business Research. She is an interdisciplinary social scientist focused on Gaza and conflict-affected areas in the Middle East. Follow her on Twitter @Mona_Jebril. 

Mona Jebril

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Sada

  • Commentary
    Sada
    Sub-Saharan African Migrants in Morocco: Security Concerns and the Test of Human Rights

    Is Morocco’s migration policy protecting Sub-Saharan African migrants or managing them for political and security ends? This article unpacks the gaps, the risks, and the paths toward real rights-based integration.

      Soufiane Elgoumri

  • Commentary
    Sada
    A House Divided: How Internal Power Struggles Shape Iraq’s Foreign Policy

    Iraq’s foreign policy is being shaped by its own internal battles—fractured elites, competing militias, and a state struggling to speak with one voice. The article asks: How do these divisions affect Iraq’s ability to balance between the U.S. and Iran? Can Baghdad use its “good neighbor” approach to reduce regional tensions? And what will it take for Iraq to turn regional investments into real stability at home? It explores potential solutions, including strengthening state institutions, curbing rogue militias, improving governance, and using regional partnerships to address core economic and security weaknesses so Iraq can finally build a unified and sustainable foreign policy.

      Mike Fleet

  • Commentary
    Sada
    The Role of E-commerce in Empowering Women in Saudi Arabia: Assessing the Policy Potential

    How can Saudi Arabia turn its booming e-commerce sector into a real engine of economic empowerment for women amid persistent gaps in capital access, digital training, and workplace inclusion? This piece explores the policy fixes, from data-center integration to gender-responsive regulation, that could unlock women’s full potential in the kingdom’s digital economy.

      Hannan Hussain

  • Commentary
    Sada
    A War Fueled by Hate Speech: Sudan’s Fall into Fragmentation

    Hate speech has spread across Sudan and become a key factor in worsening the war between the army and the Rapid Support Forces. The article provides expert analysis and historical background to show how hateful rhetoric has fueled violence, justified atrocities, and weakened national unity, while also suggesting ways to counter it through justice, education, and promoting a culture of peace.

      Samar Sulaiman

  • Commentary
    Sada
    Disarming Palestinian Factions in Lebanon: Can a Security Experiment Evolve into Sovereign Policy?

    The August 2025 government decision to restrict weapons to the Lebanese state, starting with Palestinian arms in the camps, marked a major test of Lebanon’s ability to turn a long-standing slogan into practical policy. Yet the experiment quickly exposed political hesitation, social gaps, and factional divisions, raising the question of whether it can become a model for addressing more sensitive files such as Hezbollah’s weapons.

      Souhayb Jawhar

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.