The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) presents a critical yet under-examined element in the broader context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. While it was established in 1949 to provide temporary relief for Palestinian refugees displaced during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, UNRWA has evolved into an entity that perpetuates, rather than resolves, the refugee issue. Its continued operations raise significant questions about the agency’s alignment with international legal norms, the Oslo Accords, and its impact on the geopolitical landscape.
At the heart of UNRWA’s controversy lies its unprecedented definition of Palestinian refugeehood. Unlike the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), which operates under a mandate to provide durable solutions for refugees through repatriation, resettlement, or local integration, UNRWA uniquely permits refugee status to be inherited indefinitely. According to UNRWA’s own records, the initial population of 750,000 refugees in 1948 has expanded to over 5 million today—a nearly sevenfold increase. This exponential growth contrasts starkly with other global refugee populations, where numbers typically decline due to resettlement and integration initiatives.
Several studies by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA), highlight that this hereditary definition not only violates UNHCR norms but also obstructs any realistic resolution of the refugee crisis. By perpetuating a narrative of grievance and victimhood, UNRWA has institutionalised a cycle of dependency, effectively ensuring that generations of Palestinians remain refugees in perpetuity.
The Oslo Accords, signed in 1993, represented a pivotal moment in Israeli-Palestinian relations, aiming to lay the groundwork for mutual recognition and eventual peace. A critical component of Oslo was the transfer of governance responsibilities to the Palestinian Authority (PA), including education, healthcare, and social services within Palestinian territories. This decentralisation was intended to build Palestinian self-reliance, reduce dependency on international aid, and prepare the PA for eventual statehood.
However, UNRWA’s operations have actively undermined this framework. By maintaining control over refugee camps and running parallel systems for education and healthcare, UNRWA has created enclaves of influence that bypass PA governance. A 2021 study by the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) underscores that these camps often function as autonomous zones, fostering radicalisation and limiting the PA’s capacity to assert authority.
Moreover, UNRWA’s educational curriculum, documented extensively by organisations such as IMPACT-se, has been found to include antisemitic and anti-Israeli content. This directly contravenes Oslo’s emphasis on fostering coexistence and peace. Textbooks used in UNRWA schools frequently glorify violence and deny Israel’s right to exist, effectively indoctrinating a new generation into a cycle of hostility.
The financial operations of UNRWA further complicate its legitimacy. Historically, Western nations have borne the overwhelming burden of funding the organisation. By 1972, six Western countries had contributed $735 million to UNRWA, while the combined contributions of five wealthy Arab states amounted to just $8.5 million—barely 1% of the total. Today, the trend persists. A 2022 Congressional Research Service report noted that the United States remains UNRWA’s largest single donor, contributing approximately 30% of its $1.6 billion annual budget. In contrast, Arab states collectively account for a fraction of the funding.
This disparity raises significant ethical and practical concerns. UNRWA allocates approximately $298 per Palestinian refugee annually, compared to $2.80 per refugee in Sudan under UNHCR. This inequity not only diverts critical resources from more urgent global crises but also reinforces perceptions of a politicised agenda.
The intersection of UNRWA’s operations with terrorism is also a growing concern. Reports have revealed that UNRWA facilities, including schools and hospitals, have been used by Hamas to store weapons and ammunition. Moreover, documented instances of UNRWA employees actively participating in terrorist activities underscore systemic vulnerabilities within the organisation.
UNRWA’s operational framework, far from alleviating the plight of Palestinian refugees, has entrenched a system of dependency, radicalisation, and conflict. By deviating from international norms and undermining the Oslo Accords, the agency perpetuates the very crisis it was established to resolve. Without meaningful reform, UNRWA will continue to serve as a barrier to peace, rather than a bridge toward resolution. Policymakers must confront these realities and recalibrate their approach, ensuring that international aid serves the cause of stability and coexistence rather than perpetuating division and hostility.
