Al presidente de Estados Unidos, Donald Trump, le gusta apostillar cada vez que se habla de Ucrania que esa no es su guerra y que no se hubiera producido si él hubiera estado a los mandos cuando estalló. No podrá decir lo mismo sobre la crisis en Oriente Próximo después de que Israel bombardeara en la madrugada del viernes objetivos nucleares iraníes, pese a las declaraciones públicas del estadounidense en contra, y en vísperas de una nueva ronda de negociaciones entre Washington y Teherán sobre el programa nuclear iraní. Trump ha reconocido que Israel le advirtió de sus intenciones. Pero, ya sea porque no pudiera o porque no quisiera, no disuadió al primer ministro Benjamín Netanyahu de golpear a su mayor enemigo.

“Sabíamos lo que estaba ocurriendo”, aseguró el presidente de EE UU al diario Wall Street Journal en una breve entrevista telefónica. Trump aseguró que había hablado con Netanyahu y que preveía volver a hacerlo a lo largo de este viernes. Aseguró que la operación fue “un ataque muy exitoso, por decirlo de manera suave”.

Antes, Trump había instado a Teherán a sentarse en la mesa negociadora sobre su programa nuclear, si no quería sufrir ataques aún más brutales. “Le di a Irán una oportunidad tras otra de llegar a un acuerdo. Les dije que sería mucho peor que cualquier cosa que supieran, anticiparan o les dijeran, que Estados Unidos fabrica el mejor y más letal equipo militar de todo el mundo, POR MUCHO, y que Israel tiene mucho de él, con mucho más por venir, y saben cómo usarlo. Ya ha habido gran muerte y destrucción, pero todavía hay tiempo para hacer que esta masacre, con los próximos ataques ya planeados siendo aún más brutales, llegue a su fin. Irán debe llegar a un acuerdo, antes de que no quede nada”, escribió en su red social, Truth.

El presidente ha optado por presentarse como el policía bueno en la pareja Estados Unidos-Israel. Subraya que EE UU no ha participado en la operación israelí para disuadir a Teherán contra cualquier tentación de atacar los intereses estadounidenses en Oriente Próximo como represalia. Y llama a Irán a continuar las conversaciones nucleares previstas para este domingo en Omán.

En sus mensajes, presenta el golpe de Israel, que amenaza con nuevos ataques, como una advertencia para que Irán dé pasos rápidos y evite la destrucción completa de sus instalaciones. Al anunciar las conversaciones con Irán hace dos meses, el republicano había anunciado un plazo de 60 días para lograr un pacto: el bombardeo israelí llegó exactamente cuando se cumplía el día 60.

“Hace dos meses le di a Irán un ultimátum de 60 días para cerrar un acuerdo”, escribió el presidente en Truth, su red social. “¡Tenían que haberlo hecho! Hoy es el día 61… ¡ahora tienen, quizás, una segunda oportunidad!”. E incidió, en una entrevista telefónica en la cadena de televisión ABC: “Les dimos una oportunidad y no la aceptaron… Recibieron el golpe más fuerte posible. Y vienen más. Muchos más”.

Trump presidió este viernes una reunión de su Consejo de Seguridad Nacional, el primero que se convoca públicamente en respuesta a una crisis en lo que va de mandato del republicano, para abordar la situación creada tras el golpe israelí y la posibilidad de una escalada que pueda arrastrar a la región —y al propio Estados Unidos—.

Por su parte, el Departamento de Estado ha instado a los ciudadanos estadounidenses en Irán a marcharse lo antes posible del país. Aquellos que no puedan abandonarlo deben permanecer en el lugar en el que se encuentren y no tratar de desplazarse, según ha indicado en un mensaje de alerta diplomática.

Una oportunidad

“Para Trump, esto es una oportunidad que le ha caído del cielo”, opina Henri Barkey, del think tank Council of Foreign Affairs. Por un lado, al llamar a Teherán a negociar “está intentando respaldar su propia posición, pues había dicho todo este tiempo que en las negociaciones se estaba muy cerca de llegar a un acuerdo”. Por otro, también está intentando aumentar la presión sobre Irán, “diciendo: ‘miren, no van a ganar esta pelea con los israelíes. Les sale mucho más a cuenta llegar a un acuerdo con el resto del mundo, y aprovechar las ventajas económicas, dejar de ser un Estado paria”, explica el experto.

Pero no está nada claro que llegue a celebrarse esa nueva ronda de negociaciones, la sexta, en la que Estados Unidos iba a estar representada por Steve Witkoff, el enviado de la Casa Blanca para negociaciones con Rusia y Oriente Próximo. Irán ha prometido una respuesta contundente al bombardeo; su presidente, Masud Pezeshkian, aseguró que la represalia “hará que Israel lamente su acto insensato”. El Estado judío anunció este viernes que su enemigo había lanzado un centenar de drones contra su territorio, algo que Teherán descartaba.

“Aunque Trump puede haber tenido la esperanza de utilizar estos ataques como medida de presión en las negociaciones, es más probable que tengan el efecto opuesto: empujar a los iraníes a endurecer su posición”, considera Trita Parsi, del think tank Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

Si las perspectivas de una solución diplomática a las actividades iraníes de enriquecimiento de uranio terminan de desplomarse, a Trump se le plantea un dilema. Una posibilidad es que Irán opte por poner fin a su colaboración con la comunidad internacional: no necesariamente retirarse formalmente del Tratado de No Proliferación, pero sí expulsar a los inspectores del Organismo Internacional de Energía Atómica (OIEA) que han estado supervisando las actividades nucleares de la República Islámica. Con su programa nuclear oculto a los ojos del mundo, podría acelerar la ruta en pos de armamento, algo que hasta ahora ha negado que sea su intención.

En ese caso, el presidente estadounidense tendría que plantearse si actuar por la vía militar para evitar que Teherán se convierta en una potencia nuclear. Algo que no agradaría a sus bases, contrarias a cualquier tipo de intervencionismo en el exterior.

“Es posible que entremos en un nuevo capítulo en el que los esfuerzos contra la proliferación en Irán ya no recurran al OIEA y la diplomacia internacional, sino una acción en la que hay que reexaminar este asunto desde la opción militar”, considera Ray Takeyh, también del Council of Foreign Affairs.

Mohamed Nabil Zeidan swears that his seven remaining children — his eldest son, 22, was killed by an Israeli attack months ago — have gone three months without eating bread. This has been the case since almost March 2, when Israel completely banned the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza. Last week, someone told them that “the Americans” were distributing food. They were referring to the two food distribution sites opened on May 27 in the center and south of the Gaza Strip by a shadowy organization, with unknown funding, but sponsored by Israel and the United States: the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF).

Last Sunday, this family walked eight hours to reach the Rafah distribution center in the south. They hadn’t yet reached the second gate, along with “hundreds of thousands of other people,” when the Israeli military “started shooting,” recalls the 46-year-old bricklayer. A terrified crowd separated the mother, along with two of her children, from the father. “Get down on the ground,” the woman shouted to the children. Ahmad, 12, later saw her lying lifeless with her face pressed against the ground. “The tanks were approaching, and a man told me, ‘Run away! They’ve killed your mother!’” he recalls over the phone, with the incessant sound of shelling and the cries of other children in the background.

Since May 27, attacks attributed to the Israeli army have killed around 100 people near or even inside GHF centers, a claim the organization has repeatedly denied in its statements, which describe its distributions as “peaceful” and “incident-free.” In several of these press releases, they attribute these and other allegations against the organization to “inaccurate news” based on “unverified and unsubstantiated sources” and “fabricated and exaggerated narratives in media coverage.” Meanwhile, the United Nations has described GHF activities as “a militarized food distribution mechanism,” which numerous NGOs accuse of serving the aims of a 20-month-long Israeli invasion in which at least 55,000 people have died.

In what is probably the best version of the contents of the cardboard boxes of food this organization claims to be delivering — which was captured in a photograph released by the Israeli army last week — there are four packages of pasta, one of rice, two kilos of flour, two bottles of vegetable oil, and some cans of, for example, tinned tomatoes. There is nothing fresh, no fruit or vegetables. There are no eggs or dairy products, not even powdered ones, no nutritional supplements, no infant formula, and no hygiene products.

These foods are enough, according to the GHF, to feed five to six people for up to four days. The boxes include, according to GHF statements, between 63 and 65 rations that it describes as “meals,” even though they are unprepared food. While Gaza agonizes, with its 2.1 million inhabitants on the brink of famine, the GHF claims that, as of last Friday, 140,640 food boxes have been distributed at its two distribution sites, equivalent to nearly nine million of these “meals” (8,952,142, to be exact).

Humanitarian organizations, experts, and witnesses consulted by EL PAÍS consider these figures implausible. First of all, due to the high number of packages supposedly distributed by this new organization, which exceeds the number managed by U.N. agencies and NGOs with decades of experience distributing food in conflict zones. On its first day of operation, and already amid reports of chaos and starving Palestinians shot while trying to obtain food, the GHF claimed to have distributed 8,000 boxes in a few hours. A U.N. agency can distribute between 500 and 1,000 packages daily, according to a source from the organization.”

Several witnesses also deny that the number of boxes seen at the GHF centers was high. Mohamed Zeidan, whose wife died at the Rafah distribution site, claims to have seen only “six pallets of boxes” there. A U.N. worker with no relation to Zeidan, who spoke to this newspaper on condition of anonymity, cites other testimonies that allude to a similar estimate: “Five pallets of boxes.”

In a statement released Friday on its Facebook page, the GHF asserts, on the contrary, that it is “working to increase the daily quantities [of food],” with the goal “of reaching 4.5 million meals distributed daily.” It then addresses Gazans: “Please be assured that the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation will continue to ensure the necessary quantities of food for all good residents of Gaza.”

If the quantity of cardboard boxes distributed and the food they contain raises questions, so does the suitability of these foods for a malnourished population like Gaza. The GHF boxes barely include sources of animal protein — except for a few cans of tuna — nor healthy fats, vitamins, or minerals.

There is no infant formula or specific food for children. Nor are there nutritional supplements, even though, since January, humanitarian organizations working under the U.N. umbrella in Gaza have identified more than 16,500 children aged under five with severe acute malnutrition. Around 40% of Gaza’s population is aged under 14.

The flour and rice included in the foundation’s boxes are commercial, not those enriched with iron and B vitamins — such as folic acid, vital for pregnant women — distributed by the U.N. in contexts of malnutrition. The main humanitarian agency in Gaza, the U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA), which usually centralizes distributions for other organizations in the U.N. system, distributed these cereals, as well as powdered milk, infant formula, nutritional supplements, more protein-rich foods, and, when possible, fruits and vegetables.

The GHF boxes don’t always contain the same foods, according to witnesses like Zeidan, who describes the contents as much poorer than those depicted in the Israeli army photograph: “Each box contained three kilos of flour, a bag of about 12 crackers, one kilo of semolina [coarse wheat flour], sometimes one kilo of sugar, and one kilo of lentils or chickpeas,” he recalls. “With three kilos of flour, I barely make enough bread to feed my [seven] children for a day. That box isn’t even enough to feed a family of four for a day,” he laments.

The U.N. worker in Gaza claims that some packages only include “tea, sugar, and noodles; others, oil and rice.” According to this aid worker, with extensive experience in humanitarian aid distribution, the GHF’s figures, which include between 60 and 65 rations in each box, “make no sense.”

Unrealistic and insufficient figures

From Ramallah in the West Bank, Bushra Khalidi, advocacy manager for the NGO Oxfam, describes these GHF figures as “a joke” and argues that, even if they are true, the food is barely enough to feed the population of Gaza “for one day.” The GHF distribution centers are also in the southern half of the Gaza Strip, while around “one million people” are in the north, the U.N. worker points out, separated from the southern half by Israeli military corridors that they cannot cross.

The GHF food, he adds, also has a serious drawback: it must be cooked, which requires fire and/or water. Since Israel imposed a total blockade on humanitarian aid in March, not a drop of fuel or a gas cylinder has entered Palestinian territory. Wood is practically depleted, and nine out of 10 Gazans have no access to drinking water.

Humanitarian organizations, meanwhile, remain unable to distribute food because the Israeli government continues to block its entry into Gaza and because fear of looting by the starving population prevents them from distributing the little that does arrive. This situation has not changed significantly since May 18, when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced he would allow limited food into the Gaza Strip to appease U.S. criticism.

Israel has presented the GHF as an alternative to the United Nations system and NGOs, who have refused to collaborate with this foundation, which violates the humanitarian principles of independence — it is associated with an invading army — and impartiality, and does not even ensure the traceability of the food it delivers.

In contrast, humanitarian organizations distribute aid following a series of steps to ensure it reaches those in need. First, these organizations identify the beneficiaries and the profile of the family unit — for example, if there are infants who need formula milk — before beginning the distribution of food or hygiene products, blankets, clothing, and materials for shelter such as tents.

Once identified, priority is given to the most vulnerable beneficiaries — children, the disabled, the elderly, and female heads of household — and they are summoned “with a phone call or text message” to one of the 400 distribution points available to the United Nations system throughout Gaza, “usually a five- or 10-minute walk from their homes,” explains the U.N. aid worker. The GHF has only two operational centers, which, moreover, are not open every day due to the chaos that prevails there.

Once at the NGO or U.N. distribution points, the beneficiary shows an ID and signs for the collection of aid. The boxes usually have a label attached to the side detailing the contents.

The U.N. official believes that without the GHF complying with this or a similar protocol, the organization’s activities “cannot be defined as a genuine humanitarian distribution, not even of food.”

“Who is the GHF distributing this food to? How are they doing it? Humanitarian distribution doesn’t consist of leaving boxes of food on the ground, only for a crowd of people, whose rule of law prevails, to fight over them,” he says.

A video from the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation itself, broadcast by CNN, shows the Rafah distribution site. Dozens of boxes lie piled up on the ground as a crowd runs around trying to grab some food. Some Gazans open the packages, with no one apparently monitoring who takes what or how many boxes are distributed. In several of its statements, the GHF itself has asked Gazans not to open the packages inside the distribution site. In the sky, flashes emitted by a type of machine gun common to the Israeli army, according to an expert cited by the network, break the darkness. Other recordings show people with two boxes, others with torn and open containers, others with bags, and many with empty hands.

Sean Carroll, president of the NGO Anera, which runs community kitchens in the Gaza Strip, argues that even if the GHF figures are accurate, “just as important as the number of meals distributed are the number of people still starving, and also the dangerous and undignified way in which that food is being distributed.”

Criminal gangs

Both Mohamed Zeidan and the U.N. worker, who do not know each other, told EL PAÍS that those receiving these food boxes from the GHF are often not “ordinary Gazans.” Their testimonies and others reported on social media maintain that criminal gangs are hoarding the food with the complicity of Israel and the U.S. mercenary companies that monitor the distribution sites. The U.N. aid worker argues that these criminals then sell the food outside of these centers.

Zeidan recounts how “a thug” held a gun to his 20-year-old daughter’s head to steal some food she had managed to stuff into a bag. The incident occurred inside the “closed military zone” of the GHF site in Rafah.

On Thursday, former Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman accused the Netanyahu government of supplying weapons to criminal gangs in Gaza. The Israeli prime minister’s office has not denied this.

“This is not help. It’s a place of humiliation, death, and insult,” says Zeidan, now a widower. For UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini, the GHF sites are “a death trap.”

Julieta Espín, a professor of Near Eastern International Relations at the Complutense University of Madrid, who wrote her thesis on UNRWA, concludes that the establishment of the U.S.-Israeli foundation is not intended to help or feed Gazans. She believes the foundation’s real objective is, in fact, “to put an end to UNRWA and its humanitarian assistance to Palestinian refugees, which the Israeli government sees as an obstacle to these people settling in other countries and thus [being able to] seize their territory.”

Meanwhile, the destruction of all traces of life in Gaza continues. While Israel defends the GHF as an alternative to U.N. agencies and NGOs, its army continues to raze not only infrastructure and homes, but also the orchards, greenhouses, farms, and fields that allowed the enclave’s population to produce some fresh food.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition

“We’re being attacked! A war crime is being committed.” Brazilian activist Thiago Ávila sounded the alarm on social media around midnight on Monday: the Madleen ship, carrying the Freedom Flotilla and a symbolic shipment of humanitarian aid for Gaza, had been intercepted by the Israeli army. “Greta Thunberg is currently on her way to Israel, safe and in good spirits,” the Foreign Ministry confirmed in a message on X featuring a photo of the Swedish activist being offered a bun by a soldier.

Several of the 12 activists traveling on the Madleen managed to share videos and brief messages from the moment they claim to have been ‘kidnapped’ by Israeli forces. Ávila emphasized that, as the ship was in international waters, Israel has committed a war crime with this operation and by preventing the legitimate arrival of humanitarian aid to Gaza.

Franco-Palestinian MEP Rima Hassan, who was also on board, shared an hourly message on X to record when the vessel lost communication due to the Israeli intervention. “As soon as you stop hearing from us, it means the internet has been cut off and Israel is preparing to attack us. This will give you a better idea of ​​the timing,” she explained. The first was at 11:12 p.m. local time on Sunday, and the third and final one at 1:12 a.m. on Monday.

Shortly after, Hassan published a final image of the ship’s deck, covered in paint-like stains. “A drone above us released a white liquid,” she reported on X. The radio had stopped working due to intentional “jamming,” so they could no longer request help from another vessel. Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz congratulated the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) on their “swift and safe capture of the Madleen flotilla to prevent them from breaking the blockade and reaching the shores of Gaza.”

According to Katz’s statement, he ordered his soldiers to “show passengers the video of the horrors of the October 7 massacre when they arrive at the port of Ashdod.” He also lashed out, as he had the day before, against the Swedish activist: “It is appropriate that antisemitic Greta and her fellow Hamas supporters see exactly who this terrorist organization they came to support and whom they are working for is.”

For its part, Hamas has condemned the interception of the ship and called the operation “state terrorism” and a “blatant attack on human conscience.” The volunteers, it argued, intended to “break the siege and expose the crime of hunger.” The Freedom Flotilla’s attempt to deliver aid to Gaza means, according to the Islamist party-militia’s media channels, that “Gaza is not alone.”

On Sunday afternoon, when the ship was less than 300 kilometers (185 miles) from the coast of the Palestinian enclave, Katz warned that he had instructed the IDF to act to prevent “the flotilla of hate” from reaching the shores of Gaza. “I have instructed the IDF to act so that the Madleen does not reach Gaza. To the antisemitic Greta and her friends, I say clearly: You should turn back, because you will not reach Gaza,” he added.

In anticipation of the boat’s interception by Israeli forces, the activists had prepared a series of videos in which they stated their names and nationalities, with passports in hand as proof, including that of Spanish volunteer Sergio Toribio. They called on their respective governments to intervene. They also asked citizens to lobby through various channels for their countries’ leaders to take action against Israel.

In this regard, the Freedom Flotilla coalition also emphasized that the Madleen is a UK-flagged civilian vessel and that the UK “has a legal obligation to protect its vessel and the civilians on board from Israeli intervention.” UN Special Rapporteur on Palestine Francesca Albanese made a similar call: “The UK government must urgently seek a full clarification and ensure the immediate release of the vessel and its crew.” She also requested that the vessel be allowed to continue “its legitimate humanitarian mission.”

The Freedom Flotilla was created in 2010 as a peaceful coalition in solidarity with the Palestinian people. Its humanitarian purpose was to bring aid to Gaza during the Israeli blockade of the enclave. That year, a convoy carrying 10,000 tons of aid to the Strip, consisting of six boats with 750 people, was also intercepted by Israeli forces, resulting in a fatal attack: 10 people died and around 20 were injured in the military intervention.

On this occasion, the Freedom Flotilla’s objective was to bring a symbolic amount of food to the starving population of Gaza, primarily rice and infant formula. But above all, its journey represented a symbolic attempt to “open a humanitarian corridor” after months of blockades and obstruction of the entry of goods.

Israel has been preventing the smooth flow of humanitarian aid to the Strip since March 2, when Benjamin Netanyahu’s government imposed a total blockade that lasted more than 80 days. The hunger and shortage crisis was so severe, with the entire population of the territory (2.1 million people, almost half of whom are children) at serious risk of famine due to lack of food, that Israeli authorities opened the door to a limited number of trucks.

However, the UN has repeatedly denounced the insufficient amount of aid reaching Gaza. Israeli forces only allow access to 100 trucks carrying supplies, despite organizations estimating that between 500 and 600 of these vehicles are needed each day to meet the population’s basic needs.

The U.S.- and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Fund (GHF)’s militarized distribution of food parcels outside the UN does not address Gazans’ food needs, does not provide acceptable safety conditions — more than 100 people have been shot dead while visiting GHF distribution points — and therefore does not comply with fundamental humanitarian principles, according to NGOs and the UN.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition