A key international food insecurity monitor has retracted its alarming report warning of imminent famine conditions in northern Gaza, following pressure from the Biden administration, recent reports indicate. The Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET), which is funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), initially raised the alarm about the devastating impact of Israel’s near-total blockade on food access for residents of northern Gaza. The retraction of this report has ignited criticism from various humanitarian and human rights advocates, who assert the need for independent assessments of the worsening situation.
Earlier this week, FEWS NET published findings indicating dire hunger levels, estimating deaths from starvation could reach between two and 15 per day due to the blockade’s severe restrictions on humanitarian aid. This assessment, reported by the Associated Press, stated the mortality threshold for famine—defined as two or more deaths per day per 10,000 people—was on the verge of being met. Notably, it had corroborative support from other agencies, such as the UN-backed Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC), which indicated the potential for famine conditions throughout Gaza.
Following the report's release, U.S. ambassador to Israel, Jacob Lew, publicly challenged its findings, labeling them as “outdated and inaccurate.” He claimed the report did not properly reflect the rapidly changing situation on the ground. This public challenge marked the beginning of the Biden administration’s push for FEWS NET’s retraction. According to reports, USAID confirmed it had requested the monitoring organization to withdraw its warning, asserting the published report failed to acknowledge necessary technical comments and uncertainties.
The withdrawal of the report has drawn vehement criticism from experts and humanitarian organizations who argue the U.S.’s political influence is corrupting impartial assessments of humanitarian crises. Scott Paul, from Oxfam America, noted the ambassador’s action appeared to leverage political power to undermine the research of the expert monitoring group. Former Human Rights Watch Executive Director Kenneth Roth added, “It sure looks like USAID is allowing political concerns—the Biden administration’s worry about funding Israel’s starvation strategy—to interfere.”
The conflict surrounding this report emphasizes the sensitive relationship between U.S. foreign policy and humanitarian assessments, particularly concerning allegations of genocide and human rights violations by Israel against Palestinians. Following the retraction, FEWS NET indicated its report is under review, with plans to be re-released next month with updated findings—a timeline viewed with skepticism by many humanitarian advocates who argue immediate action is necessary.
Critics have highlighted the constraints imposed by Israel’s blockade, which have severely limited the flow of humanitarian aid. Reports indicate as few as 12 trucks of food were allowed entry to northern Gaza since October amid allegations of systematic obstructions by the Israeli military. With the humanitarian situation deteriorated to unprecedented levels, organizations like Oxfam have expressed the need for urgent measures. Oxfam’s Middle East Director, Sally Abi-Khalil, stated, “It’s abhorrent…despite international law being so publicly violated…world leaders continue to do nothing.”
U.S. engagement with the political dynamics of the Gaza conflict poses challenges for agencies like FEWS NET, which were established to deliver unbiased analyses on food security. The potential for comprehensive famine declarations remains high, underscoring both the humanitarian crisis and the political ramifications tied to such announcements. The new report—expected to circulate with adjusted data—will be closely monitored, not only for its findings but also for the broader impact it may have on U.S. diplomacy and international responses to the situation on the ground.
This incident raises significant questions about the integrity of global humanitarian monitoring efforts and the extent to which political interference can shape narrative and actions involved. Amid fears of public health crises and humanitarian disasters, the international community remains at a crossroads, as advocates call for accountability and more transparent support structures to help those impacted by conflict and famine.
