On December 13, 2025, the United Nations General Assembly delivered a resounding message to the world: with 139 countries voting in favor, it adopted a resolution urging Israel to comply with the International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) ruling and allow unrestricted humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip. The move, introduced by Norway and backed by more than a dozen co-sponsoring nations, underscored a growing international consensus around the urgent need for relief in Gaza, where the humanitarian situation has reached catastrophic levels.
The resolution’s passage was not without controversy. Twelve countries, led by the United States and Israel, voted against it, while 19 others abstained. The text calls on Israel to provide food, water, medicine, and shelter to Gaza’s beleaguered population, and to stop obstructing relief operations. It also demands full, unhindered access for humanitarian agencies and specifically highlights the essential role of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) in delivering aid. The resolution reaffirms the UN’s ongoing responsibility toward the question of Palestine until a comprehensive solution is achieved.
According to Quds News Network and Middle East Eye, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza has dramatically worsened since October 7, 2023. Israeli military operations, described by some international observers as a genocide, have led to mass killings, starvation, widespread destruction, and the forced displacement of the population. Nearly 70,000 Palestinians—most of them women and children—have been killed, and around 160,000 injured. Despite a US-brokered ceasefire and prisoner exchange agreement that took effect on October 10, 2025, Israel has reportedly violated the deal multiple times, resulting in hundreds more civilian casualties.
The General Assembly’s resolution did not arise in a vacuum. It followed an October 2025 advisory opinion by the ICJ, which outlined Israel’s responsibilities under the UN Charter and international humanitarian law. The court found that Israel’s restrictions on aid to Gaza, as well as its ban on UN agencies like UNRWA, were inconsistent with its international legal obligations. During hearings, more than 40 states and international organizations presented evidence—most arguing that Israel had breached its duty to facilitate the entry of life-saving assistance to Palestinians under occupation. Only Israel, the US, and Hungary dissented, citing military necessity and security concerns, arguments the court ultimately rejected.
Norway’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Merete Fjeld Brattested, presented the draft resolution with a somber warning: “2024 was among the most violent years in three decades, and 2025 has followed suit,” she said. “Civilians are paying the highest price. Respect for humanitarian principles is eroding, and the most fundamental tenets of humanitarian law are under pressure.” Brattested stressed that member states had sought legal clarity from the ICJ on fundamental issues related to providing humanitarian assistance to Palestine’s civilian population. She cited recent incidents, including UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres’s condemnation of Israel’s “unauthorized entry” into UNRWA’s Sheikh Jarrah compound, calling it “in clear violation of Israel’s obligation to respect the inviolability of United Nations premises.”
The United States, however, took a sharply different view. US envoy Jeff Bartos rejected the resolution, calling it part of the General Assembly’s “decades-long pattern of unfairly targeting Israel.” He accused UNRWA of being “a subsidiary of Hamas,” describing the agency as “unaccountable, corrupt and irredeemably compromised,” and insisted it “will play absolutely no role going forward in Gaza.” Bartos argued that compelling Israel to work with UNRWA “would amount to a gross infringement on sovereignty.” Defending Washington’s position, he stated that the US was working to increase humanitarian aid, noting that “over 800 trucks entered Gaza each day on average” between October and December 2025. “The United States will vote against this resolution,” Bartos declared, urging others to do the same while pledging to advance President Donald Trump’s vision for “a peaceful and prosperous Gaza… free from terrorist rule and violence.”
Israel’s response was equally forceful. Its Foreign Ministry condemned the resolution, claiming it “once again proves that the UN is a morally distorted body.” Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, took to social media to denounce the vote, saying the resolution was “calling on Israel to cooperate with terrorism. That will not happen.” Danon went further, branding UNRWA a “hotbed of terrorism” and insisting, “For the sake of peace in the world, UNRWA must go.”
UNRWA, for its part, found strong support in the General Assembly’s decision. Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini welcomed the outcome, describing it as “a strong endorsement” of the ICJ’s finding that allegations of Hamas infiltration within UNRWA were “not substantiated,” and that claims questioning the agency’s neutrality lacked basis. “This vote is an important sign of support for UNRWA from the overwhelming majority of the international community,” Lazzarini said. He called on member states to continue supporting UNRWA’s efforts to respond to Gaza’s dire humanitarian conditions and to expand its critical public health and education services.
Palestinian National Council Speaker Rouhi Fattouh also applauded the resolution, stating that the wide margin reflected “a firm international position supporting UNRWA and renewing recognition of its legal mandate and key role in protecting Palestinian refugees.” He warned of a “dangerous escalation” marked by increasing occupation-related crimes, ethnic cleansing, and a worsening humanitarian crisis across the occupied Palestinian territory.
The debate over UNRWA’s future has grown increasingly heated. In January 2024, Israel accused the agency of harboring Hamas members and complicity in terrorist activity. Following an internal investigation, UNRWA dismissed nine Gaza-based staff members who “may have” been involved in the October 7, 2023 attacks on southern Israel, though public evidence for their involvement has not been disclosed. The US, which had long been UNRWA’s largest donor, halted funding under the Biden administration. The Trump administration has gone further, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio stating that UNRWA “can have no future in the running of Gaza” and calling it a “subsidiary of Hamas.” The US is now reportedly considering sanctions that could effectively cripple UNRWA’s ability to carry out US dollar transactions and banking operations.
Despite these pressures, UNRWA and its supporters maintain that the agency remains an impartial and indispensable humanitarian actor. William Deere, director of UNRWA’s Representative Office in Washington, DC, noted that multiple independent entities have assessed UNRWA and found it to be “an impartial and indispensable humanitarian actor.” UNRWA-USA’s executive director, Mara Kronenfeld, warned that US sanctions would prevent the transfer of critical funds for humanitarian relief, stating, “If UNRWA is declared outrageously and unwarrantedly and unprecedentedly a foreign terrorist organisation, we would not be in a position to continue to send funds to them, and these funds are critical for the humanitarian relief of those suffering terribly.”
The resolution also drew support from the foreign ministers of eight Muslim and Arab countries—including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, the UAE, Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey, and Qatar—who issued a joint statement emphasizing UNRWA’s “indispensable role… in protecting the rights of Palestinian refugees and caring for their affairs.” These countries are working with President Trump’s administration on the next phase of the Gaza ceasefire, which, as reports show, has been repeatedly violated.
As the humanitarian crisis in Gaza deepens and diplomatic tensions mount, the General Assembly’s vote signals a clear international demand for action. Whether this will translate into tangible relief for Gaza’s civilians remains uncertain, but the world’s attention is firmly fixed on the unfolding tragedy—and on those with the power to change its course.
