President Joe Biden's initiative to construct a temporary pier for delivering humanitarian aid to Gaza has encountered significant challenges and criticism, according to a recent report by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) inspector general.
The $230 million military-run project, announced by Biden during his State of the Union address in March, aimed to address the dire food crisis in Gaza but fell short of its ambitious goals. As reported by NPR, the project operated for only about 20 days and faced numerous obstacles, including weather issues and security concerns.
The USAID report revealed that some agency staffers had expressed reservations about the pier project, worrying that it might divert attention from efforts to persuade Israel to open more efficient land crossings for aid delivery. Despite these concerns, once President Biden issued the directive, USAID focused on implementing the Joint Logistics Over-the-Shore (JLOTS) system as effectively as possible.
The Biden administration had set a target for the sea route and pier to provide food for 1.5 million Gaza residents over a 90-day period. However, the project fell significantly short of this goal, managing to deliver enough food to feed approximately 450,000 people for only one month before operations ceased.
The project faced numerous setbacks, including repeated damage to the pier caused by high waves and adverse weather conditions. Additionally, the United Nations World Food Program (WFP) withdrew its cooperation following an Israeli rescue operation in the vicinity, which raised concerns about the perceived neutrality and independence of WFP workers in the conflict.
Despite these challenges, National Security Council spokesman Sean Savett defended the project's impact, stating that it played a crucial role in delivering food to Palestinian civilians during a critical time.
The USAID inspector general's report also highlighted issues regarding the United States' adherence to commitments made to the World Food Program. These commitments were crucial in securing the UN agency's participation in distributing supplies from the pier to Palestinians.
According to the report, the U.S. had agreed to certain conditions set by the WFP, including placing the pier in northern Gaza where aid was most needed and ensuring that a UN member nation would provide security for the pier. These measures were intended to safeguard the WFP's neutrality in the conflict.
However, the Pentagon ultimately decided to place the pier in central Gaza, reportedly for better security of the pier and military personnel.
Furthermore, after failing to find a neutral country willing to provide security, Israel's military took on this role, contradicting the initial agreement with the WFP.
A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, disclosed that USAID staff concerns about the project potentially undermining overall aid efforts were raised early in the process. In response to these concerns, USAID reportedly increased its staffing to address both the pier project and land routes simultaneously.
The official emphasized that this staffing adjustment was made to ensure that the agency could effectively manage both aspects of aid delivery to Gaza. This response indicates that USAID attempted to balance the implementation of the president's directive with ongoing efforts to improve aid delivery through existing land crossings.
In conclusion, the USAID inspector general's report has shed light on the challenges faced by President Biden's Gaza pier project. While the initiative aimed to address the urgent humanitarian crisis in Gaza, it encountered numerous obstacles and fell short of its intended goals. The project's limited success, coupled with concerns raised by USAID staff and issues with commitment fulfillment, highlights the complexities involved in delivering aid to conflict zones. Despite these setbacks, the administration maintains that the project made a meaningful impact during a critical period.
