Aid Groups Draw 'Red Line' at Israeli Data Demands, Vow to Stay in Gaza Despite MSF Ban
In a significant show of defiance, a growing number of international aid organizations operating in Gaza are refusing an Israeli directive to submit extensive personal data about their Palestinian staff members. The move comes in the wake of Israel's decision to revoke the operating license of Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), with at least eight major groups now joining MSF and Oxfam in non-compliance.
"Providing these lists crosses a fundamental red line for humanitarian principles and directly endangers our teams," a spokesperson for Première Urgence Internationale told Al Jazeera. The organizations, including Action Aid, American Friends Service Committee, and Medical Aid for Palestinians, argue that the requirement—which includes passports, CVs, and family details—compromises staff safety and violates international data protection standards.
The Israeli Ministry for Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism, which issued the order to 37 groups on January 1, frames it as a necessary measure for "security and transparency." However, aid workers and legal experts see it as part of a broader pattern of obstruction. Since the war began in October 2023, over 550 aid workers have been killed in Gaza, including 15 from MSF.
"Humanitarian access is not a bargaining chip. Under international law, Israel has an unconditional obligation to facilitate relief," stated Médecins du Monde in its refusal. The groups contend the policy forces them into complicity with a political agenda, undermining the neutrality essential to their work.
The expulsion of MSF, which provides 20% of Gaza's hospital beds and assisted in one of every three births there last year, has raised alarms about a collapsing health system. "The destruction of the health system is a central tenet of this genocidal project, and it needs to continue even into a 'ceasefire'," said British-Palestinian surgeon Dr. Ghassan Abu Sittah, who has volunteered in Gaza.
Experts warn that removing established NGOs could pave the way for Israeli-controlled alternatives that fail to meet humanitarian needs. Dr. James Smith, an emergency physician who has worked in Gaza, drew parallels to the failed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a scheme during which over 850 Palestinians were killed while seeking aid in 2025. "The fear is they will create pseudo-humanitarian systems under complete control, used to enact violence rather than deliver aid," he said.
As the February 28 deadline for MSF to cease operations looms, the standoff highlights a critical juncture for humanitarian operations in the territory. With most of the 37 contacted groups either refusing to comply or declining to comment, the coalition's unified stance presents a direct challenge to Israeli policy, framing it as a choice between bureaucratic compliance and the core mandate of saving lives.
Voices from the Ground & Abroad
Elena Rodriguez, Aid Coordinator (based in Amman): "This isn't about paperwork; it's about intimidation. Every name on a list handed to the Israeli military is a potential target. Our duty of care forbids it. The international community must recognize this for what it is: a deliberate strategy to dismantle the last remaining lifelines in Gaza."
David Chen, Policy Analyst at a D.C. Think Tank: "While Israel has legitimate security concerns, the blanket, non-negotiable nature of this demand undermines its own stated goals. It cripples the distribution network for aid it claims to support. A more targeted, cooperative mechanism with credible safety guarantees is urgently needed to avoid a total collapse of services."
Sarah Klein, Former UNRWA Officer (Sharply Critical): "This is a transparent, grotesque lie. They've killed the doctors, bombed the hospitals, and now they want the names of the few left so they can finish the job? They're not 'assessing alternative solutions'—they are the cause of the catastrophe. It's genocide by bureaucracy, and the world's muted response is complicity."
Professor Anwar Hassan, International Law, Cairo University: "The legal precedent is clear. The Fourth Geneva Convention obliges an occupying power to ensure the provision of food and medical supplies. These demands appear designed to create a pretext for expelling organizations that bear witness to the conditions on the ground, effectively criminalizing humanitarianism itself."