The Biden Administration faces intense scrutiny over a $230 million aid package intended to construct a floating pier in Gaza, with growing concerns about its execution and feasibility.
At a Glance
- President Joe Biden ordered the aid package despite warnings.
- The $230 million project managed to operate for only 20 days.
- High waves and security issues led to the withdrawal of aid groups.
- The project was permanently shut down after delivering limited aid.
Biden Administration’s Controversial $230 Million Gaza Pier Aid Package
President Joe Biden authorized a $230 million aid package aimed at constructing a temporary pier to deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza. Despite significant concerns from USAID staffers, the project went ahead using the Joint Logistics Over-the-Shore system (JLOTS). The pier operated for nearly 20 days before encountering numerous setbacks.
Aid groups withdrew from the project by July due to deteriorating weather and persistent security issues. USAID staff were worried about diverting attention from more efficient land crossings, but the directive from the President shifted their focus entirely to the pier initiative. “Multiple USAID staff expressed concerns that the focus on using JLOTS would detract from the Agency’s advocacy for opening land crossings,” according to the inspector general report.
The United States Agency for International Development on Tuesday published its report into Pres. Biden’s troubled aid pier in the Gaza Strip, blaming a combination of weather and security challenges for its failures. https://t.co/xNfSFSF5AR
— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) August 28, 2024
Challenges and Shortfalls of the Pier Project
The pier was expected to feed 1.5 million people for 90 days but only managed to support around 450,000 individuals for about a month. High waves and bad weather repeatedly damaged the pier. Additionally, the UN World Food Program pulled out of the project after an Israeli rescue operation near the site intensified neutrality concerns.
“Tonight, I’m directing the US military to lead an emergency mission to establish a temporary pier in the Mediterranean on the coast of Gaza that can receive large shipments carrying food, water, medicine, and temporary shelters,” Biden said in justifying the project. However, security issues compounded by unrealistic expectations plagued the initiative from its inception.
“The bottom line is that given how dire the humanitarian situation in Gaza is,” stated National Security Council spokesman Sean Savett, “the United States has left no stone unturned in our efforts to get more aid in, and the pier played a key role at a critical time in advancing that goal.” However, despite the ambitious objective of delivering up to two million meals per day, the logistical and security challenges ultimately undermined the pier’s potential impact. Only 8,000 metric tonnes of aid were delivered during its operation and the initiative barely scratched the surface of the needs in Gaza.
Compounding Issues and Project Shutdown
The Biden administration placed the pier in central Gaza for better security, contradicting prior agreements with the World Food Program. After failing to secure cooperation from a neutral country for pier vicinity security, the Israeli military stepped in. Strains on the aid effort further escalated when the pier was initially stationed at the Israeli port of Ashdod before detaching it from Gaza’s coastline.
“It was a boondoggle from start to finish,” Jeremy Konyndyk of Refugees International stated. Critics argue that politicized decisions overshadowed practical humanitarian considerations, leading to the project’s failure. The Pentagon’s effort to mitigate logistical issues was insufficient, reinforcing claims of oversight gaps in the administration’s foreign aid approach.
With limited aid delivered and increasing safety concerns, the Biden Administration ultimately shut down the pier. A plan to reattach the structure and channel aid from Cyprus to Gaza was abandoned. Critics have emphasized the need for risk assessments and accountability measures to prevent similar failures in international aid efforts. The contentious debate surrounding this project is likely to influence future oversight mechanisms and policy decisions in humanitarian assistance.
