New Delhi: The future of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) has come under renewed international scrutiny after the recently established “Board of Peace” declared that the UN agency “has no place in the new Gaza Strip.” The statement has triggered a fierce backlash from Palestinian political factions, including the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and Hamas, while reigniting a wider debate over UNRWA’s role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, allegations of terrorist infiltration, and the agency’s long-standing handling of the Palestinian refugee question.
The controversy extends beyond humanitarian assistance. At the centre of the dispute lies the issue of the Palestinian “right of return,” UNRWA’s unique refugee mandate, and recent Israeli allegations that Hamas and other militant organisations have deeply penetrated the agency’s operations in Gaza.
Palestinian leadership defends UNRWA as guardian of the ‘Right of Return’
The immediate reaction to the “Board of Peace” declaration highlighted the political significance that Palestinian leaders attach to UNRWA.
In announcing that “UNRWA has no place in the new Gaza Strip,” the Board of Peace argued that Gaza must move beyond “the complex of perpetual aid dependency and conflict,” adding that “the people of Gaza deserve better.” The statement suggested that future humanitarian arrangements should replace UNRWA with new mechanisms focused on reconstruction and long-term rehabilitation.
Palestinian officials strongly rejected the proposal. Ahmed Abu Holi, a member of the PLO Executive Committee and head of its Department of Refugee Affairs, accused the Board of Peace of attempting to “liquidate the Palestinian refugee issue.” He insisted that UNRWA represents “the moral responsibility and strict legal obligation of the international community towards the rights of refugees, leading to their return and compensation.”
Abu Holi further argued that any attempt to dismantle the agency constituted “a direct assault on Palestinian national identity” and an attack on the “right of return.” He also warned that Palestinian refugees would “strongly resist” efforts to abolish UNRWA.
The Speaker of the Palestinian National Council, Rouhi Fattouh, echoed similar concerns, describing UNRWA as the “legal and historical witness to the Nakba”, the term Palestinians use to describe the establishment of Israel in 1948. According to Fattouh, the agency embodies the international commitment to Palestinian refugee rights until both return and compensation are implemented. Ending UNRWA, he argued, would effectively erase the legal status of Palestinian refugees.
Another senior PLO Executive Committee member, Ahmed Majdalani, similarly stated that the Board of Peace’s proposal “touches the core of the Palestinian issue,” which he identified as the refugee question and the right of return. He maintained that the right of return remains a fundamental principle that cannot be compromised.
Hamas also issued a strong response, condemning proposals to end UNRWA’s operations or reduce its mandate. The Iran-backed organisation urged the international community to ensure the continuation of UNRWA’s activities until Palestinians secure what Hamas described as their “legitimate rights,” including the right of return.
UNRWA’s refugee mandate under growing criticism
These statements have reinforced the argument made by critics of UNRWA that the agency has evolved beyond its humanitarian mission into a political institution closely linked with preserving the Palestinian refugee issue.
Unlike the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), whose mandate focuses on finding durable solutions through resettlement, local integration or voluntary repatriation, UNRWA operates under a separate framework exclusively for Palestinian refugees.
Critics argue that while UNHCR generally works towards ending refugee status by helping displaced populations rebuild their lives, UNRWA has institutionalised refugee status across generations. More than seven decades after the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, the number of registered Palestinian refugees has expanded from approximately 700,000 to several million because refugee status is inherited by descendants.
According to this view, UNRWA has become the international symbol of the Palestinian demand that the remaining refugees of 1948, together with millions of their descendants, should be permitted to settle inside Israel.
Supporters of Israel argue that many Palestinians fled during the 1948 war after five Arab armies invaded the newly established Israeli state and were subsequently not allowed to return because they had not remained loyal during the conflict.
🚨 SCANDAL EXPLODES: Trump Admin Uncovers 1,500 UNRWA "Aid Workers" Tied to TERRORISM
You won't believe this — over 1,500 UNRWA employees now under investigation for Hamas links.
School principals running Hamas military units… with tunnel shafts and anti-tank positions UNDER… pic.twitter.com/CcWbXOsFW8
— FAQTS Uncensored (@FAQTSUncensored) July 15, 2026
Israeli analysts contend that implementing a mass right of return would fundamentally transform Israel’s demographic balance by replacing its Jewish majority with a Muslim Arab majority. Consequently, successive Israeli governments across the political spectrum have rejected the proposal, arguing that it would effectively end Israel’s existence as the Jewish nation-state.
Today, Israel’s population stands at roughly 10 million people. Around two million Arab Israelis, approximately 20 per cent of the country’s population, are descendants of Arabs who remained within Israel following the 1948 war. They enjoy full Israeli citizenship and participate across public life, including serving as members of parliament, Supreme Court judges, university professors, doctors, business leaders and bankers. While military service is generally voluntary for Arab Israelis, many choose to serve in the Israel Defence Forces.
Critics, therefore, argue that continued insistence on the right of return remains one of the principal obstacles to any future Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement.
Israeli report details Hamas Infiltration and Use of UNRWA facilities
Alongside political criticism, UNRWA faces serious security allegations arising from an extensive report published by the Israel Defence Forces (IDF).
According to the report, at least 1,462 of UNRWA’s 12,521 employees in the Gaza Strip, approximately 12 per cent of the workforce, are members of Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), or other terrorist organisations.
The report further claims that infiltration extended into UNRWA’s education system. Among the agency’s 546 school principals and deputy principals in Gaza, at least 80 were identified as members of designated terrorist organisations, including Hamas’ military wing.
Israeli authorities allege that Hamas systematically exploited UNRWA facilities throughout Gaza for military purposes.
According to the report, Hamas constructed an extensive network of terror tunnels beneath UNRWA schools, established command centres inside or beneath agency facilities, stored weapons in UN buildings, and launched rockets from areas adjacent to UN compounds.
One of the report’s most significant allegations concerns Hamas’ intelligence infrastructure. Israeli investigators claim Hamas operated an advanced server data centre for its central intelligence office directly beneath UNRWA’s Gaza headquarters while drawing electricity from the UN facility itself.
During Israeli military operations targeting the underground infrastructure, the report states that forces discovered large quantities of military equipment within the UN compound, including explosive drones, sniper rifles, grenades, RPG launchers, rockets and mortar bombs.
Israeli authorities also say intelligence materials recovered from the premises indicated that Hamas personnel had used UNRWA offices as operational facilities. According to the report, the bodies of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad operatives were also recovered from within the compound.
The allegations extend to the Hamas-led attacks against Israel on 7 October 2023. According to the Israeli report, some UNRWA employees actively participated in the assault, including kidnappings carried out inside Israeli territory. One individual specifically identified in the report is Faisal Ali Mussalem Al-Naami.
Israeli authorities allege that surveillance camera footage and cellular phone data placed Al-Naami inside Kibbutz Be’eri during the October 7 attack. They further allege that he participated in abducting an Israeli civilian and was filmed loading the body of a deceased Israeli into a sport utility vehicle before transporting it into Gaza. These allegations have intensified international debate over UNRWA’s internal oversight, staff vetting procedures and operational neutrality.
UNRWA dismisses staff amid mounting scrutiny
Against the backdrop of the Israeli allegations, UNRWA recently announced the dismissal of 70 employees in Gaza over concerns regarding links to terrorist organisations.
The agency nevertheless stressed that the dismissals “do not constitute in any way a validation of the claims made against them.”
MASSIVE PROBE: The USAID Office of the Inspector General has referred over 100 current and former UNRWA staff members to the State Department for suspension over their alleged involvement in the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks against Israel, as a massive investigation continues.…
— Fox News World (@FNCGlobalNews) July 13, 2026
While welcoming the dismissals as an important development, critics argue that the decision itself demonstrates recognition that security concerns exist within the organisation.
They further question whether removing 70 employees sufficiently addresses allegations involving a much larger number of staff members identified by Israeli intelligence.
The Debate over Gaza’s future
The debate surrounding UNRWA has therefore expanded beyond humanitarian aid to encompass broader questions regarding governance, accountability and the future political architecture of post-war Gaza.
Critics argue that instead of encouraging Palestinians to move beyond refugee status, UNRWA has helped institutionalise what they describe as the central illusion sustaining the conflict, that Israel will eventually absorb millions of Palestinian refugees and their descendants.
For this reason, supporters of the Board of Peace maintain that UNRWA should not be included in any future governance structure established in Gaza following the conflict. They argue that humanitarian assistance should unquestionably continue, ensuring that Palestinians not involved in terrorism receive access to education, healthcare, reconstruction assistance and economic opportunities.
However, they contend that these responsibilities should instead be managed by new international mechanisms working alongside Arab governments that have historically expressed solidarity with the Palestinian cause.
Supporters of restructuring Gaza’s humanitarian framework further argue that Arab states should use their influence to press Hamas to disarm and relinquish political and military control over the Gaza Strip.
They also argue that any future United States policy under the Trump Administration should insist that post-war governance arrangements exclude UNRWA and instead establish institutions focused on rehabilitation, development and long-term stability rather than dependency.
Critics further contend that Palestinian leaders should abandon what they describe as the unrealistic expectation that millions of descendants of the 1948 refugees will eventually return to their former family homes inside Israel.
According to this perspective, maintaining the promise of a mass right of return has encouraged unrealistic political expectations while prolonging one of the world’s longest-running refugee disputes.
The intense Palestinian opposition to proposals eliminating UNRWA, supporters of the Board of Peace argue, demonstrates that the agency has evolved into far more than a humanitarian organisation. They contend that it has become a political institution dedicated to preserving the refugee issue and sustaining one of the conflict’s most contentious demands.
As discussions continue over Gaza’s post-war reconstruction, UNRWA’s future is likely to remain one of the most divisive issues confronting international policymakers. Whether the agency is reformed, replaced or continues under its existing mandate will have significant implications not only for humanitarian relief but also for the broader political future of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The debate now extends well beyond aid distribution. It encompasses competing visions for Gaza’s reconstruction, Palestinian national aspirations, Israel’s security concerns, international humanitarian obligations and the search for a political framework capable of ending a conflict that has endured for generations.
