Description
In the geopolitically fraught terrain of Gaza, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for the Near East (UNRWA), has long relied on humanitarian principles to secure operational space. The 2023 Gaza War, while devastating for Palestinians, has also had consequences for UNRWA, which has been targeted militarily and politically. To what extent, and for what purposes, has UNRWA articulated core humanitarian principles in its public statements during the Gaza War? Evidence is drawn from a quantitative content analysis of public statements from UNRWA, Human Rights Watch (HRW), and Amnesty International (AI) to compare humanitarian and human rights discourses. A census sample of press releases, reports, and official statements from the first 10 months of the war was analyzed. The research finds that UNRWA was more likely to articulate humanitarian principles, particularly humanity and impartiality, than AI and HRW, whose discourse was more politicized. UNRWA’s use of these principles spiked following key events that threatened UNRWA’s physical and organizational survival, including after Israel’s allegations that UNRWA staffers participated in the October 7 attacks. This research provides deeper insight into how humanitarian organizations respond to reputational and operational threats and how humanitarian principles might be employed strategically to diminish such threats.
