Head of controversial U.S.-backed Gaza aid program quits citing 'humanitarian principles'

Head of controversial U.S.-backed Gaza aid program quits citing 'humanitarian principles'

The head of a new U.S. and Israel-backed organization set to distribute aid in Gaza has quit, saying it would be impossible to do the job without compromising basic humanitarian principles. Jake Wood, executive director of theGaza Humanitarian Foundation,said he was "proud of the work" he had so far overseeing the project. However, it was impossible to implement the plan while also adhering to the "humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality, and independence," he said in a statement published byReuters. The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, or GHF, said it would launch operations Monday despite the resignation of Wood,a U.S. military veteran and co-founder of the nonprofit Team Rubicon, described on its website as a "veteran-led humanitarian organization that serves global communities before, during, and after disasters and crises." Wood and GHF did not immediately respond to requests for more information. Israel has promoted plans for an aid distribution overhaul in the shattered Palestinian enclave despite widespread condemnation from humanitarian groups already working there, including the United Nations. They have warned that the initiative risks stripping the humanitarian process of its independence, deepening Israel's control over Gaza and risking the future weaponization of aid. COGAT, the Israeli military's liaison with Palestinians and Israeli Prime MinisterBenjamin Netanyahu's office, did not respond to requests for comment on Wood's resignation and on GHF's stated plan to launch operations Monday. In a separate statement, GHF's board said it was "disappointed" by Wood's departure, but would push forward with its plan and begin distributing aid in Gaza starting Monday. "Our trucks are loaded and ready to go," it added, according to Reuters. Wood's resignation came as Israel continues to allow only atrickleof much-needed aid into Gaza while also pressing on with its latest military offensive, which has killed hundreds, including children, in the span of weeks. Before the renewed attacks, Israel'sblockadeon food and medicine halted entry vital supplies for more than two months, and spurred a freshhumanitarian crisisin the enclave marked by warnings of widespread starvation. Questions have swirled around the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation since its launch. Nate Mook, the former CEO of World Central Kitchen who had previously been reported as a member of the board, told NBC News he had never been involved with the initiative. Netanyahu said last week that under the plan, aid will be delivered to Palestinian civilians in designated "safe zones," with already displaced families expected to eventually move once again to southern Gaza "for their own safety." Aid groups have warned that in addition to undermining a long-held humanitarian framework in the enclave, that the plan will once again force widespread displacement in Gaza, while also concentrating distribution in areas that may not be accessible to everyone. Civilians, already exhausted and hungry after 18 months of war, displacement and hunger, who do not move south would be at greater risk under Israel's military assault, the groups warn. Netanyahu has said the effort was aimed at allowing civilians to receive humanitarian aid "without Hamas interference," repeating the assertion that the militant group was diverting aid. Humanitarian groups operating in Gaza have denied that the militant group was siphoning off supplies. Joseph Belliveau, executive director of MedGlobal, an Illinois-based humanitarian nonprofit providing medical aid in Gaza, accused Israel of using a "non-existent problem" to justify its decision to overhaul aid distribution in Gaza in what he described as a bid to gain further control over the enclave. The aid overhaul comes after Israel banned the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees, or UNRWA, from operating in Gaza, alleging that Hamas members had infiltrated the agency and that a number of staff members had taken part in the Oct. 7, 2023, attacks. Last August, an independent investigation commissioned by U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres found that nine staff working for UNRWA, which had thousands of workers in the enclave, may have been involved in the attacks. The ban, which came into effect in January, sparked alarm among aid groups, with UNRWA Director-General Philippe Lazzarini warning of "disastrous" consequences. The Biden administration halted funding to UNRWA last year, a measure the Trump administration has supported. Humanitarian groups have condemned Israel for trickling only a small amount of aid into Gaza in the week since lifting its blockade. As of early Monday, just under 500 trucks carrying aid and goods had entered the enclave in the week since Israel announced May 18 that it was lifting its blockade, according to a tally of data shared by COGAT. That's roughly the same number of trucks that entered Gaza daily before the war began, according to aid groups. Nearly 54,000 Palestinians, including thousands of children, have been killed in Gaza since the war began, according to the Health Ministry in the enclave, which has been run by Hamas since 2007. Israel launched its offensive following the Hamas-led Oct. 7, 2023, terrorist attacks, in which some 1,200 people were killed and around 250 taken hostage into Gaza, according to Israeli counts, where just under 60 remain captive, both dead and alive.

byRoger Fisher

in

May 26, 2025

Head of controversial U.S.-backed Gaza aid program quits citing 'humanitarian principles'

Head of controversial U.S.-backed Gaza aid program quits citing 'humanitarian principles' The head of a new U.S. and Israel-backed o...

Read More

NIH staff stage walkout during director’s town hall as tensions persist over research cuts, ideology

NIH staff stage walkout during director's town hall as tensions persist over research cuts, ideology

Twenty-seven minutes into a town hall with staff last week, US National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya acknowledged that he was going to get into uncomfortable territory. "This one's a tough one for me," Bhattacharya told the audience of researchers and other NIH employees gathered in an auditorium at the biomedical research agency's headquarters in Bethesda, Maryland, last Monday, before introducing one of the most divisive topics in science. "It's possible that the [Covid-19] pandemic was caused by research conducted by human beings," he said, according to a video obtained by CNN. "And it's also possible that the NIH partly sponsored that research. And if that's true – " At that point, Bhattacharya paused to watch as dozens of NIH staffers stood and filed out of the auditorium. "It's nice to have free speech," he said with a smile. "Welcome, you guys." Bhattacharya then persisted. "If it's true that we sponsored research that caused a pandemic – and if you look at polls of the American people, that's what most people believe, and I looked at the scientific evidence; I believe it – what we have to do is make sure that we do not engage in research that's any risk of posing any risk to human populations," he said. The walkout was a gentle protest, one Bhattacharya – a former Stanford professor of health policy and economics who frequently claimed to have beencensoredduring the Covid-19 pandemic for communicating views in opposition with those held by US scientific leadership at the time – referred to later in the town hall as "silent dissent." It represented not just disagreement with – and dismay over – Bhattacharya's assertion that the NIH may bear some responsibility for the pandemic, whichkilledmore than 7 million people worldwide, by sponsoring so-called gain-of-function research that created the SARS-CoV-2 virus that then leaked from a lab. That's a viewnot sharedby a large number of expert virologists and epidemiologists, who think it's more likely the virus emerged via a spillover from animals. It was also a preplanned protest over working conditions; the staffers just chose to leave a little earlier than intended, as Bhattacharya made those comments, some told CNN. The walkout was designed to communicate frustrations over scientists' inability to do their jobs under the second Trump administration, they said. "We'd been trying to meet with Dr. Bhattacharya as members of the union to discuss issues we've had with working conditions that prevented us from doing our jobs and research," said Dr. Kaitlyn Hajdarovic, a postdoctoral researcher at NIH. Like others who spoke with CNN, she emphasized that she was speaking in a personal capacity and as a member of a union representing about 5,000 early-career researchers at the NIH. Hajdarovic and others described issues obtaining materials for research because the people who do the purchasing had been dismissed; the firings and rehirings of scientist colleagues; the fear of a proposed 40% cut to the NIH budget; and general chaos and unpredictability that are disruptive to their day-to-day jobs. "We were trying to use this walkout as a way to get a sit-down meeting with Dr. Bhattacharya," said Dr. Matt Manion, another NIH postdoctoral researcher and union member. "We've asked at least twice since he took over the role." The union members, joined by others at the agency, had planned to leave the town hall at the start of Bhattacharya's time answering pre-submitted questions, added Dr. Matthew Brown, a third union member and postdoctoral fellow. Bhattacharya and his chief of staff, Seana Cranston, noted several times that about 1,200 questions had been submitted and that they'd chosen the "hard ones" to answer. "Having these sort of preplanned town halls is not a substitute for actually sitting down with scientists who will do the research that improves the health of the American public," Brown said. In response to CNN's request for comment, a spokesman for HHS said, "at Monday's town hall, the NIH Director addressed staff openly and took unscripted questions from the audience. The individuals who walked out had the opportunity to engage directly and voice their concerns constructively. Instead, they chose to walk out, seemingly driven more by political motives because of their dissent with this administration." Brown countered that the group's dissent "is based on the tremendous damage that has been done to taxpayer-funded biomedical research over the past four months. Protecting our research into diseases like cancer, diabetes, and Alzheimer's deserves more than a short question and answer session." Still, although the walkout was planned for a different reason, the gain-of-function comments didn't go over well. One NIH scientist tied the comments to anew policythat says the agency will prohibit foreign subaward grants, or research funding arrangements in which a grant recipient passes on some of the funding to foreign collaborators; the White Housebudget proposalfor fiscal year 2026 cited NIH's funding of research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology as part of its reasoning for a proposed nearly $18 billion cut to the NIH's budget. "The notion that you can use thelab leak theoryas justification to cancel all foreign subawards is ridiculous," said the scientist, who requested anonymity for fear of reprisal. "They are doing it purely for political and/or ideological reasons. "Whether or not you agree with the theory, foreign subawards support research to prevent the next pandemic," the scientist added. "Canceling them all at once with little to no warning is asking for another pandemic." A spokesman for HHS said, "NIH is transitioning from foreign subawards to foreign subprojects to ensure that all recipients of American taxpayer dollars—whether domestic or international—are held to the same rigorous standards of oversight, accountability, and transparency." There were other points of tension during the town hall, too. At one point, Bhattacharya took a previously submitted question about the NIH's approach to diversity, equity and inclusion, an issue the Trump administration has targeted,terminatinga large number of research grants. "The question is, how should we define health disparities research in a way that clearly separates it from DEI while continuing to address the costly consequences of US health disparities?" Cranston prompted Bhattacharya. Bhattacharya responded that he has, "in my own research, focused on vulnerable populations, and very often that means minority populations." But, he continued, "there's been a line of research supported by the NIH that I don't actually fundamentally believe is scientific, that is ideological in nature." To provide an example, Bhattacharya cited redlining, orracial discriminationin housing and lending practices. "You could imagine a study looking at the effect of redlining on the access to health care for people, right? That's a completely legitimate kind of study," Bhattacharya said. "That would be a, I think, completely legitimate kind of study for the NIH to support." A member of the audience then spoke up. "Then why is NIH terminating them?" she said. "I'm sorry, the NIH is not terminating those studies," Bhattacharya responded. "I want to make a distinction –" "Oh, I disagree!" the audience member shot back as colleagues applauded. "Let me finish," Bhattacharya said. "So the other kind of studies, for instance, what I want to distinguish from is something like 'structural racism causes poor health in minority populations.' " "What do you think redlining is?" the audience member said. "The problem there is that it's not a scientific hypothesis," Bhattacharya argued. "You can't, in principle, think of a way to test that hypothesis where, in principle, you could falsify it." The director also told NIH staff that he'd arrived in the job the day of mass dismissals as part of the HHS' Reduction in Force, or RIF, April 1, and that he hadn't had a say in them. HHSsaidit cut 1,200 employees from the NIH. "I actually don't have any transparency in how those decisions were made," Bhattacharya said. "And I was quite upset about that. It would be nice to have had some say." Bhattacharya said he's tried to make conditions better since he arrived based on feedback from employees, including by turning purchasing cards back on and enabling travel to conferences. He also suggested that he'd put a stop to a requirement that employees send anemaileach week detailing five things they'd accomplished. "I heard you guys have to do five points every week," Bhattacharya said. "That was ridiculous. I'm really flat proud that we don't have to have some of the best scientists in the world tell me what they did last week with five points. That made no sense." The audience applauded that. And later in the program, Bhattacharya took a few questions from the audience that didn't appear planned. To one, which was inaudible on the video CNN reviewed, Bhattacharya responded, "No gloves? … That should not be happening. We'll get that fixed." A week after the town hall, the union members said they still hadn't heard from Bhattacharya's office about scheduling a meeting. For more CNN news and newsletters create an account atCNN.com

byRoger Fisher

in

May 26, 2025

NIH staff stage walkout during director’s town hall as tensions persist over research cuts, ideology

NIH staff stage walkout during director's town hall as tensions persist over research cuts, ideology Twenty-seven minutes into a town ha...

Read More

Trump EPA drafting a rule that would undo decades of progress on limiting pollution from power plants

Trump EPA drafting a rule that would undo decades of progress on limiting pollution from power plants

The Environmental Protection Agency is drafting a proposed regulation that would end all federal limits on planet-warming pollution generated by coal and gas-fired power plants, according to documents cited by the New York Times. The proposed rule, which the agency said would be published once it has completed interagency review, would undo decades of progress on limiting US climate pollution and could drive up energy prices if expensive coal plants remain on the grid longer as a result. At a minimum, it is a sharp reversal from the Biden administration's policies to lower pollution from power plants and make the air around them healthier to breathe. The Biden EPA finalized new rules last year that would have compelled coal and new natural gas power plants to either cut or capture 90% of their climate pollution by 2032. In a statement, an EPA spokesperson referenced a 2022 Supreme Court decision striking down the Obama-era Clean Power Plan and said there were "concerns" that the Biden administration's "replacement for that rule is similarly overreaching and an attempt to shut down affordable and reliable electricity generation in the United States." "As part of this reconsideration, EPA is developing a proposed rule," the spokesperson added. "The proposal will be published once it has completed interagency review and been signed by the (EPA) Administrator." The documents the New York Times acquired argue the US share of global power plant pollution has fallen, and that even if US power plants cut all of their emissions and pollution, it would not "meaningfully" improve public health in the US — a claim likely to be fiercely challenged by public health researchers and organizations. Power plants are the second-biggest emitters of planet-warming pollution in the US, making up around a quarter of the country's climate pollution. US power plants contribute 3% of total global climate pollution. The proposed rule follows a March announcement from the EPA that it would overturn more than a dozen Biden-era air pollution and climate rules. Trump's EPA announced in March it was preparing to reconsider and strike down a consequential scientific finding on the dangers of climate pollution that has served as the basis behind federal regulations to curb them. Dismissing the precedent would strip the EPA's authority to manage the pollution that causes global warming. "President Trump promised to kill the Clean Power Plan in his first term, and we continue to build on that progress now," EPA administrator Lee Zeldin said in a statement. For more CNN news and newsletters create an account atCNN.com

byRoger Fisher

in

May 26, 2025

Trump EPA drafting a rule that would undo decades of progress on limiting pollution from power plants

Trump EPA drafting a rule that would undo decades of progress on limiting pollution from power plants The Environmental Protection Agency is...

Read More

Kilauea volcano on Hawaii's Big Island has latest eruption

Kilauea volcano on Hawaii's Big Island has latest eruption

Avolcano's latest eruption on Hawaii's Big Islandfountained lava more than 1,000 ft. into the sky overnight. On May 25, the Kilauea volcano, on the island of Hawaii, had a plume reach about 5,000 ft. high, according to aHawaiian Volcano Observatory status report. The eruption was in a closed area ofHawai'i Volcanoes National Park, located about 200 miles and several islands southeast of Honolulu. The national park has Kilauea andMauna Loa, the latter being the world's largest active volcano. Kilauea is one of the world'smost active volcanoes, the U.S. Geological Survey said. With its summit at 4,091 ft., Kilauea has had lava fountaining from itsHalemaumau crater since Dec. 23, the observatory, which is part of USGS, said in its May 25 report. This is the 23rd episode of the ongoing eruption from Halemaumau, which is part of Kilauea's larger caldera at its summit. The May 25 eruption occurred in two vents of Halemaumau, first beginning with the north vent fountaining at 9:48 p.m. local time and the south vent at 10:25 p.m. The eruption ended abruptly when the south vent fountained, reaching heights of over 800 ft. Overnight, officials were primarily concerned with high levels of volcanic gas such as water vapor, carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide that can have far-reaching effects downwind. Sulfur dioxide reacts in the atmosphere to create visible haze of volcanic smog,called vog. In high concentrations, vog and sulfur dioxide can cause respiratory problems and other health concerns. Other concerns are what's called "Pele's hair" and other volcanic fragments from lava fountains. Pele's hair is strands of volcanic glass that can cluster together and look like tumbleweeds. The volcanic fragments fall down within a few hundred yards from eruptive vents, though strong winds can launch the light particles downwind. On the ground, Pele's hair and other fragments can cause skin and eye irritation, and officials warn residents and visitors to minimize exposure to these particles. At Kilauea's summit, there are significant hazards with the crater's instability, ground cracking and rockfalls, especially after earthquakes. But, the area has been closed to the public since 2007. Most episodes of Halemaumau's lava fountaining last a day or less. They are separated by pauses in activity lasting several days, generally. The observatory planned to issue another update the morning of May 26 local time. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:Hawaii's Big Island has latest volcanic eruption at Kilauea

byRoger Fisher

in

May 26, 2025

Kilauea volcano on Hawaii's Big Island has latest eruption

Kilauea volcano on Hawaii's Big Island has latest eruption Avolcano's latest eruption on Hawaii's Big Islandfountained lava more...

Read More

Germany's Merz says there are no more range restrictions on the weapons supplied to Ukraine

Germany's Merz says there are no more range restrictions on the weapons supplied to Ukraine

BERLIN (AP) — Germany's new chancellor said Monday that his country and other major allies are no longer imposing any range restrictions on weapons supplied toUkraine as it fights the Russian invasion. Friedrich Merzhas plunged into diplomatic efforts to try to secure a ceasefire and keep Western support for Ukraine intact since becoming Germany's leader nearly three weeks ago. On Monday, he said that "there are no longer any range restrictions for weapons that have been delivered to Ukraine — neither by the British, nor by the French, nor by us, and not by the Americans either." "That means Ukraine can also defend itself by, for example, attacking military positions in Russia," Merz said at a forum organized by WDR public television. "Until a while ago, it couldn't. … It can now." "We call this 'long-range fire' in jargon, also supplying Ukraine with weapons that attack military targets in the hinterland," he added. He didn't elaborate, and it wasn't clear whether he was referring to theeasing of restrictionson longer-range weapons late last year. Commenting on Merz's statement, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that a decision to lift range restrictions would be "quite dangerous" and "run contrary to our efforts to reach a political settlement." Germany has been the second-biggest supplier ofmilitary aidto Ukraine after the United States. Merz's government has been tightlipped on whether it will supply Taurus long-range cruise missiles, something his predecessor, Olaf Scholz, refused to do and Merz advocated for as opposition leader. The government has said it will no longer provide full details of the weapons it is supplying to Ukraine, unlike Scholz's administration, citing the need for "strategic ambiguity." Taurus missiles have a range of up to 500 kilometers (310 miles).

byRoger Fisher

in

May 26, 2025

Germany's Merz says there are no more range restrictions on the weapons supplied to Ukraine

Germany's Merz says there are no more range restrictions on the weapons supplied to Ukraine BERLIN (AP) — Germany's new chancellor s...

Read More