The controversy surrounding U.S.-Swiss aid relations primarily centers on the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a Geneva-based, U.S.-backed organization established to manage aid distribution in Gaza. GHF’s approach has sparked significant debate and scrutiny from various international actors.

The U.S.-backed approach to aid distribution in Gaza via the Geneva-based Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) raises serious concerns that could potentially conflict with international humanitarian law, including principles established under the Geneva Conventions.

GHF plans to employ private security firms to oversee aid delivery in Gaza. This strategy deviates from traditional humanitarian aid practices, raising concerns about the potential for militarization of aid and the implications for neutrality and impartiality in humanitarian efforts. Critics argue that this approach could set a precedent that undermines established humanitarian norms.

The United Nations and other organizations have criticized GHF’s aid plan, suggesting it may lack impartiality and could inadvertently contribute to the displacement of populations in Gaza. Such concerns highlight the delicate balance required in humanitarian operations to avoid exacerbating existing conflicts or humanitarian crises.

Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions emphasizes impartial aid for civilians in conflict zones. Humanitarian actors must not be perceived as military or political tools. The use of armed contractors, especially those with military backgrounds, blurs the line between combatants and humanitarians, which can endanger civilians and aid workers, and could violate the principle of distinction under International Humanitarian Law (IHL).

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits the forcible transfer of protected persons from occupied territories. The Rome Statute, Article 7 and 8, also considers forcible displacement as a war crime or crime against humanity when done systematically or unlawfully. If U.S. policy is directly or indirectly supporting population displacement, that could constitute a grave breach of international law.

TRIAL International, a Swiss NGO, has formally requested that Swiss authorities investigate GHF’s compliance with both Swiss and international humanitarian laws. The Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (FDFA) is currently assessing whether GHF’s operations align with legal requirements, particularly regarding the use of private security firms in humanitarian contexts.

Humanitarian efforts that lack independent oversight or transparency, especially when backed by a military power involved in the same region, raise suspicions of instrumentalizing aid for political or military goals- again, contradicting the core principles of the Geneva Conventions.