Israel recently rejected a United Nations-backed report stating that famine is occurring in Gaza, arguing that the findings are based on “gross forgeries.” The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC), which authored the report, indicates that nearly one-third of Gaza’s 2 million residents, about 641,000 people, face impending starvation. The report also highlights acute malnutrition affecting over 132,000 children under age five through 2026 and notes severe nutritional support needs for more than 55,000 pregnant and breastfeeding women. These alarming statistics are attributed to nearly two years of conflict, substantial displacement, the decline of local food production, and stringent aid restrictions.
In response, Israeli officials, specifically Foreign Ministry Director General Eden Bar Tal, vehemently denied the IPC’s conclusions, claiming the organization manipulated evidence to categorize the situation as famine. He accused the IPC of fabricating death counts, violating its own protocols, and selectively presenting data. Bar Tal asserted that the report was engineered for political motives, suggesting an intent to support Hamas’s agenda rather than provide an accurate assessment of the humanitarian situation in Gaza. This denial reflects Israel’s broader strategies of managing its international narrative during ongoing conflicts.
The Israeli government formally demanded the withdrawal of the IPC report and warned of potential lobbying against funding directed to the organization if it remains published. To reinforce its position, Israel circulated a presentation titled “The IPC Fraud,” which attacks the credibility of the IPC’s methodology. One of the assertions made was that the findings necessitated a skewed collection of data, with only a fraction of surveyed children being utilized to underpin the famine declaration. The Israeli stance underscores a larger concern about international perceptions of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza amidst their ongoing military actions.
The debate over the IPC report has drawn attention from various global actors, including the United States. At a recent United Nations Security Council meeting, acting U.S. ambassador Dorothy Shea acknowledged the reality of hunger but criticized the report’s credibility, citing bias among its authors, which could undermine its integrity. She suggested that the process of declaring famine did not meet acceptable standards and indicated a preference for an accurate resolution of the issue free from political bias. This response highlights the complexities of navigating humanitarian issues intertwined with political allegiances.
On the other hand, the United Nations defended the IPC’s findings, asserting that its conclusions are scientifically grounded and reliable. Stéphane Dujarric, a spokesperson for the U.N. Secretary-General, insisted that the data informing the IPC’s report comes from a range of credible sources, including organizations such as WHO, UNICEF, and the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA). Moreover, he emphasized that these assessments are subject to independent reviews, pushing back against the Israeli claims of inaccuracy and manipulation in how data regarding the humanitarian situation in Gaza is gathered and interpreted.
U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres confirmed the grave reality of the situation, stating that famine in Gaza has transitioned from a potential future crisis into a current catastrophe. He highlighted the impact of displacement and despair on families, underscoring the urgency of humanitarian intervention. As the humanitarian crisis unfolds, the conflicting narratives surrounding the IPC report reveal not just a struggle for humanitarian aid but also a broader conflict over legitimacy and representation in the context of the Israeli-Palestinian struggle.
