“Just as you expect nations to recognise your sovereignty, your identity, your own rights, your own national rights. The same thing we have vis-à-vis our capital. It’s only been the capital of the Jewish people since King David. That’s only 3,000 years ago. So, for some countries, it’s a belated recognition. For you, it was instant.”

The emergence of reports alleging covert Israeli operating facilities deep inside western Iraq has transformed what once appeared to be an obscure logistical issue into a potentially major geopolitical controversy with implications for regional sovereignty, military force posture calculations, and the evolving nature of Middle Eastern conflict dynamics.

If the allegations are ultimately verified, the reported deployment structure would indicate that the long-running strategic confrontation between Israel and Iran has expanded beyond direct missile exchanges and proxy warfare into a geographically dispersed operational ecosystem where third-country territory increasingly functions as an enabling battlespace for long-range military campaigns.

The controversy has become especially sensitive because reports from both The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times suggested American officials may have possessed prior awareness regarding the alleged infrastructure while Iraqi authorities remained either partially informed or entirely excluded from operational knowledge. Such allegations have intensified scrutiny over sovereignty management, coalition transparency, and the broader conduct of regional security partnerships.

According to reporting cited by the two newspapers, the alleged facilities were linked to Israeli operational activity directed toward Iran and may have functioned intermittently for more than a year. The New York Times later reported that at least two covert sites had reportedly been maintained across remote desert sectors in western Iraq, raising questions regarding the scale, duration, and strategic intent of the reported infrastructure.

Political sensitivity surrounding the allegations escalated rapidly after Iraqi political figures increasingly characterized the alleged facilities as evidence of foreign intrusion into Iraqi territory. Former Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi reportedly called for stronger oversight mechanisms capable of preventing Iraq from becoming an operational arena for wider regional confrontation.

For strategic analysts, however, the significance of the allegations extends well beyond Iraqi domestic politics. Remote logistical networks capable of sustaining high-tempo military operations frequently alter force projection equations throughout regions where geography historically constrained aerial reach, operational endurance, and campaign persistence.

The alleged facilities reportedly emerged across western Iraq’s expansive desert sectors near the intersections of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Syria. Analysts note that the terrain characteristics of the region create ideal conditions for discreet operational activity because sparse populations, limited infrastructure density, and vast desert corridors reduce civilian observation and complicate surveillance monitoring cycles.

Military planners increasingly prioritize such dispersed logistical architectures because modern long-range campaigns depend heavily on survivability, redundancy, and the ability to sustain operational tempo while remaining below conventional detection thresholds.

The geographic positioning of western Iraq introduces additional strategic significance. Proximity to Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, and several critical regional transit corridors potentially transforms the remote desert environment into an operational bridge linking multiple theatres of military activity across the Middle East.

Regional security observers increasingly view the broader issue through the framework of strategic battlespace expansion. Modern conflicts rarely remain geographically confined once intelligence operations, logistics chains, long-range aviation, and covert mobility networks become central determinants of campaign effectiveness.

The reported revelations therefore carry implications extending far beyond Iraq itself because covert forward operating networks often serve as force multipliers capable of reshaping strike geometry, aerial endurance cycles, and strategic reach without requiring highly visible permanent military installations.

Western Iraq’s vast Anbar-Najaf desert environment reportedly provided a uniquely permissive operational landscape where temporary military infrastructure could be concealed without extensive construction footprints or easily detectable deployment signatures.

Reports indicated that the area near al-Nukhaib attracted particular operational interest because the surrounding terrain combined sparse populations with expansive open corridors and minimal civilian infrastructure. Such conditions significantly reduce observation risks compared with urbanized or strategically monitored sectors elsewhere in the region.

Investigative reporting by The Wall Street Journal suggested that one alleged facility emerged shortly before periods of heightened escalation involving the United States, Israel, and Iran. The New York Times later reported that preparations connected to another site may have extended as far back as late 2024.

Analysts note that strategic planners frequently prioritize terrain enabling operational ambiguity because remote desert regions naturally complicate aerial surveillance cycles and ground monitoring efforts conducted through conventional intelligence systems.

One investigative account suggested that a suspected installation may have been established on a former Iraqi-era airstrip or dry lakebed approximately 180 kilometers southwest of Najaf and Karbala. Open desert terrain reportedly allowed makeshift aviation facilities to emerge with minimal engineering requirements while simultaneously supporting helicopter operations and temporary deployment structures.

Satellite imagery analysis referenced within reporting allegedly identified unusual activity patterns consistent with field logistics operations and possible aviation support infrastructure. Military analysts often regard improvised landing environments as highly valuable because dispersed aviation support locations complicate enemy targeting calculations and reduce vulnerability associated with centralized infrastructure.

The prolonged operational timeline described in the reports suggested that the activity represented a recurring logistical support architecture rather than a temporary emergency deployment linked to a single crisis cycle.

According to investigative accounts, the alleged facilities primarily functioned as forward logistical nodes supporting Israeli long-range operational activity directed toward Iranian targets. Such operations frequently depend less on aircraft performance itself and more on sustaining endurance through dispersed support infrastructure, contingency recovery systems, and flexible operational frameworks.

The reported support architecture allegedly included air-refueling coordination capabilities, helicopter operations, surveillance systems, military vehicles, temporary landing areas, electronic equipment, and emergency recovery assets designed to sustain long-range operational endurance.

Search-and-rescue preparations reportedly formed a particularly important component of the network because pilot extraction capabilities increasingly determine campaign sustainability during extended military operations. Reports indicated that helicopters and contingency recovery teams remained prepared to recover downed personnel if required during operational missions.

The New York Times further reported that the alleged infrastructure included tents, temporary deployment structures, mobile personnel support facilities, and rapidly deployable aviation staging environments intended to minimize visible permanent military signatures.

Military planners frequently establish such forward support nodes because recovery timelines directly influence pilot survivability, operational continuity, and overall campaign resilience. If accurately reported, the installations would therefore represent force multipliers rather than conventional frontline combat bases.

The controversy surrounding the alleged facilities intensified dramatically following accounts involving a local Iraqi shepherd identified as Awad al-Shammari. Reports suggested he unexpectedly encountered one suspected installation while conducting routine herding activity within remote desert sectors.

Accounts indicated he observed helicopters, soldiers, tents, and a landing strip before allegedly reporting the discovery to local authorities. Family members and local witnesses later connected his subsequent death to events surrounding the encounter, although broader circumstances remain disputed and unresolved.

Some reports alleged that a helicopter pursued his vehicle and opened fire following the discovery of unusual military activity. The incident transformed what had reportedly functioned as a concealed operational environment into a politically explosive national security issue inside Iraq.

Subsequent Iraqi security investigations reportedly attempted to examine suspicious aerial movements and unidentified activity patterns throughout western desert sectors. Investigative teams allegedly encountered aerial fire while approaching suspected operational areas.

According to accounts cited by The Wall Street Journal and amplified through regional reporting channels, at least one Iraqi soldier reportedly died before investigative personnel withdrew under continued aerial pressure. Follow-up searches later reportedly found no enduring operational presence capable of definitively confirming the allegations after tactical withdrawal procedures had apparently been executed.

The sequence illustrated how temporary military deployments can create substantial evidentiary ambiguity once rapid dismantling and mobility protocols are implemented.

Another politically sensitive dimension emerged from claims that multiple American officials possessed prior awareness regarding the alleged facilities while Iraqi authorities may not have been fully informed regarding operational arrangements occurring within Iraqi territory.

Some Iraqi political figures accused Washington of shielding Israeli activity while limiting Baghdad’s awareness regarding specific operational environments. Reports also alleged that requests had been made to reduce Iraqi monitoring activities during periods involving heightened regional military operations.

These allegations introduced difficult questions regarding transparency between security partners and the management of sovereignty within coalition operational environments. Analysts note that accusations involving concealed military access often generate political consequences extending far beyond immediate tactical objectives because sovereignty concerns directly shape alliance credibility and domestic legitimacy calculations.

No public Israeli statement has directly addressed the allegations described within the reporting.

The revelations have accelerated broader concerns regarding Iraq’s increasingly fragile position within the wider Iran-Israel strategic competition. Some Iraqi security officials reportedly minimized the allegations and suggested any foreign presence may have lasted less than forty-eight hours, while other political factions characterized the issue as evidence of serious external violations involving both Israeli and American participation.

Iraq reportedly filed complaints through diplomatic channels following the emergence of the allegations, while large-scale military sweeps involving Iraqi security forces and Popular Mobilization Forces later expanded across broad desert sectors stretching toward the Saudi frontier.

Reports indicated that the operations covered an area extending roughly 120 kilometers and focused heavily on reasserting sovereignty across remote regions considered vulnerable to covert activity.

Former Iraqi officials argued that stronger state authority mechanisms would be necessary to prevent external powers from transforming Iraqi territory into an operational battleground for broader regional confrontation.

Yet despite the growing controversy, independently verified coordinates and definitive physical evidence remain publicly unavailable. As noted by The New York Times, unresolved questions persist regarding the precise scale, operational duration, and strategic purpose of the alleged infrastructure.

The broader strategic reality emerging from these reports is that modern Middle Eastern conflicts increasingly depend less on conventional front lines and more on concealed logistics systems, flexible force posture arrangements, covert mobility corridors, and dispersed operational ecosystems capable of silently shaping regional power projection.

For many regional defence planners, the most consequential warning may not concern the alleged desert installations themselves, but rather the accelerating normalization of covert cross-border military architectures capable of quietly redrawing deterrence dynamics across the Middle East without formal declarations of war or clearly identifiable battlefronts.

Israel’s security has been a political mantra for Benjamin Netanyahu during his decades in office. In the early days of the war in Iran, he said Israel had already changed the Middle East, and its own power within it, but more than a month into the campaign the regime in Tehran is still in power, still firing missiles at Israel, and still in possession of its stockpile of highly-enriched uranium – enough, experts say, to make around a dozen nuclear bombs if further refined.

Sitting among green rolling hills, studded with olive groves, most homes in al-Mughayir are in an area where Israel’s military controls security, but the internationally backed Palestinian Authority (PA) should provide basic services. Increasingly though, it cannot – it is mired in a deep economic crisis.

The development follows an Israeli cabinet decision from May 2025 and applies to Area C of the West Bank, which encompasses some 60 per cent of the territory. 

This will mark the first time since the 1967 occupation that Israel will begin registering land as state property following approval announced by the cabinet on Sunday. 

Risk of Palestinian dispossession, greater Israeli control 

Briefing journalists in New York, UN Spokesman Stéphane Dujarric said the decision could lead to the dispossession of Palestinians of their property. It also risks expanding Israeli control over land in the area.  

“Such measures, including Israel’s continued presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, are not only destabilizing but, as recalled by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), unlawful,” he added. 

He said the Secretary-General calls on the Israeli Government to immediately reverse the measures while again warning that the current trajectory on the ground is eroding the prospect of a two-State solution between Israelis and Palestinians.  

Settlement activity illegal 

Last week, the Israeli cabinet approved measures that would increase Israeli civilian authority in Areas A and B of the West Bank, which together constitute roughly 40 per cent of the territory 

“The Secretary-General reiterates that all Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the regime associated with them, have no legal validity and are in flagrant violation of international law and relevant United Nations resolutions,” the Spokesman said. 

The UN chief called on all parties to preserve the only path to a negotiated two-State solution which is “the only path to lasting peace.” 

Ongoing Gaza aid restrictions  

Meanwhile in Gaza, humanitarians working in logistics supported the recent transportation of nearly 1,900 pallets full of food, shelter, health, water and sanitation items from crossing points along the perimeter fence with Israel to destinations inside the Strip. 

Despite this, aid operations continue to face significant impediments, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said in its latest update. 

Shipments from Jordan are restricted to a route that requires multiple offloading and reloading points. 

Those from Egypt – which come through the Kerem Shalom/Karem Abu Salem crossing – face a high return rate, with less than 60 per cent offloaded between the period from 4 to 10 February. 

Humanitarian missions blocked 

Humanitarian movements inside Gaza that require coordination with Israeli authorities also continue to face obstacles. 

Out of nearly 50 movements coordinated between 6 and 11 February, just over a half were fully facilitated and five were denied outright.  

While 11 movements were approved, they encountered significant delays and other impediments and two were only partially accomplished as a result.  

OCHA noted that two more denials were recorded on Monday, and “teams on the ground are engaging with the authorities to clarify the constraints and seek their resolution so that our operations can move forward.” 

Reuters

Reuters

More about Somalia from the BBC:

Getty Images/BBC

Jubilant crowds poured onto the streets of Hargeisa and other towns across Somaliland on Sunday, waving red-white-green national flags, setting off fireworks and chanting slogans of independence after Israel became the first United Nations member state to formally recognize the self-declared republic.

The celebrations followed Israel’s announcement on Friday, December 26, that it had extended official recognition to Somaliland, more than three decades after the territory unilaterally broke away from Somalia in 1991 following the collapse of the central government in Mogadishu. No country had previously taken the step, despite Somaliland’s long-standing claims of statehood and its relative stability in a volatile region.

“This is a historic moment for our people,” Somaliland’s President Abdirahman Mohamed Abdullahi said, hailing what he described as the birth of a “strategic partnership” with Israel aimed at promoting mutual prosperity, regional stability, and peace across the Middle East and Africa.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu framed the decision as part of a broader diplomatic realignment, calling it “in the spirit of the Abraham Accords,” the U.S.-brokered normalization agreements that have reshaped Israel’s relations with several Arab and Muslim-majority countries.

During a video call broadcast by Somaliland television, Netanyahu signed a joint declaration of mutual recognition alongside Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar. The document commits both sides to immediate cooperation in agriculture, health, technology, and security, areas Israel has highlighted as pillars of its outreach to Africa.

In Somaliland’s capital, Israeli and Somaliland flags were hoisted side by side in a ceremony broadcast live on state television. “Mass celebrations are taking place in Hargeisa and across cities of the Republic of Somaliland, as citizens proudly gather to commemorate the historic decision by the Government of Israel,” Somaliland’s foreign ministry said in a statement posted on X.

“We welcome every country that recognises our existence,” Jama Suleyman, a resident of Hargeisa, told AFP as crowds celebrated late into the night. “For the people of Somalia, our neighbours should not be concerned about this victory; we know they are making noises, but there is nothing that will make Somaliland stop from aiming high.”

The move, however, triggered swift and fierce condemnation from Somalia’s federal government, which insists Somaliland remains an integral part of the country.

Somali President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud described Israel’s recognition as “illegal aggression” and a “deliberate attack” on Somalia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. “Somaliland is an integral, inseparable, and inalienable part of Somalia,” he said, warning that the decision threatened regional peace and stability.

Somalia’s parliament passed a symbolic resolution declaring Israel’s recognition “null and void,” while the Foreign Ministry accused Israel of undermining international law and encouraging secessionist movements across Africa.

The African Union (AU) echoed those concerns, firmly rejecting any recognition of Somaliland as an independent state. In a statement, the AU reaffirmed Somalia’s territorial integrity, warning that endorsing breakaway entities could destabilize the continent and set dangerous precedents for unresolved border disputes.

Similar positions were voiced by Egypt, Turkey, the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), the Arab League, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), and the European Union, all of which reiterated support for Somalia’s unity and cautioned against unilateral diplomatic moves.

Tensions escalated further on Sunday when Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthi rebels issued a stark warning in response to Israel’s recognition.

Houthi leader Abdul-Malik al-Houthi declared that “any Israeli presence in Somaliland would be considered a military target,” framing the recognition as an act of aggression not only against Somalia but also against Yemen and Red Sea security.

The warning comes amid heightened regional tensions, as the Houthis have intensified attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, claiming solidarity with Palestinians during the ongoing Gaza conflict.

Analysts say Somaliland’s strategic position along the Gulf of Aden — near one of the world’s busiest maritime chokepoints — adds a sensitive security dimension to Israel’s decision. Some believe recognition could give Israel enhanced access for intelligence monitoring or logistical cooperation in a region critical to global trade and energy flows.

While Somaliland has largely avoided the chronic instability that plagues southern and central Somalia, where the Al-Qaeda-linked Al-Shabaab insurgency remains active, its sudden elevation onto the geopolitical stage risks drawing it into wider regional confrontations.

Israel’s closest ally, the United States, moved quickly to distance itself from the recognition. The State Department reiterated Washington’s long-standing support for Somalia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, underscoring that U.S. policy remains unchanged.

For Somaliland, however, Israel’s recognition represents a potential diplomatic breakthrough after more than 30 years of international isolation. The territory operates its own government, holds elections, issues its own currency and passports, and maintains independent security forces — yet it has remained unrecognized by the international community.

Officials in Hargeisa hope the move will open doors to embassies, ambassadors, foreign investment, and broader international engagement.

Khadar Hussein Abdi, Somaliland’s minister of the presidency, sought to calm fears of escalation. “The recognition and the arrival of Israel will not create violence, will not bring conflict, and will never harm anyone,” he said, emphasizing Somaliland’s commitment to peace and stability.

The recognition has also inflamed Palestinian concerns, amid reports linking Somaliland to controversial Israeli discussions about the relocation of Palestinians from Gaza.

In recent months, press reports have suggested Somaliland was among a handful of African territories willing to host Palestinians expelled by Israel. Those claims gained renewed attention after Dan Diker, president of the Jerusalem Center for Foreign Affairs, said in a December 28 interview clip shared on X that Somaliland had “privately offered to absorb 100,000 to 1.5 million Gazans” to provide them “safe lives.”

Diker described Somaliland as “the only country to step up,” suggesting the offer was a key factor behind Israel’s recognition — claims that have not been independently verified and which Somaliland officials have not formally confirmed.

The Palestinian Foreign Office responded with a sharply worded statement, affirming its “absolute support for the unity, sovereignty, and political independence of Somalia” and rejecting Israel’s recognition of Somaliland.

The ministry condemned what it described as recognition by an “illegitimate occupying power,” warning that Israel’s move was part of broader attempts to destabilize regional and international security in violation of international law, the UN Charter, and resolutions of the OIC.

It recalled previous references to Somaliland as a potential destination for expelled Palestinians and issued a categorical rejection of “any plans for the forced displacement of our people, under any pretext whatsoever,” calling such proposals a red line.

Somali President Mohamud echoed those concerns in an address to parliament, declaring: “Somalia will never accept the people of Palestine to be forcibly evicted from their rightful land to a faraway place, let it be Somalia or elsewhere.”

As celebrations continue in Somaliland and condemnation spreads elsewhere, Israel’s recognition has sent shockwaves through Africa, the Middle East, and beyond. Whether the move remains a solitary diplomatic gesture or becomes the first crack in decades of international consensus remains uncertain.

For now, Somaliland’s supporters see a long-awaited affirmation of statehood, while critics warn of destabilizing consequences in one of the world’s most fragile regions — a reminder that recognition, while symbolic, can carry profound geopolitical weight.

BBC

Reuters

Reuters

Reuters

Israeli Prime Minister’s Office/handout via Reuters

Reuters

Reuters

Reuters

EPA

The White House

Reuters

Reuters

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said a second phase of the US-brokered plan to end the war in Gaza is close – but that key issues still need to be resolved.

Under the second phase of President Donald Trump’s plan, Israel should withdraw its troops further from Gaza as a transitional authority is set up and an international security force is deployed. Hamas is meant to disarm and reconstruction to begin.

With questions outstanding over Hamas disarmament, one senior official has suggested the group is ready to consider “freezing or storing” its remaining weapons.

The US and other mediators have been applying pressure on both sides to advance to the next stages of Trump’s plan.

According to Arab media reports, a Red Cross team and members of Hamas’s armed wing, are resuming searches for the last remaining deceased Israeli hostage, police officer Sergeant Ran Gvili, in the Zeitoun area of Gaza City.

Gvili was killed in the Hamas-led 7 October 2023 attacks and his body should be returned under the terms of the initial ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas. “We’ll get him out”, Netanyahu said at a news conference on Sunday.

Two months after the Gaza ceasefire came into effect, both sides continue to accuse each other of almost daily violations. Israeli forces remain in control of more than half of the Gaza Strip. Hamas has largely re-established itself in the remainder of the territory.

Speaking to journalists, Netanyahu said that he would hold important discussions with President Trump at the end of the month on how to ensure the plan’s second stage was achieved. An Israeli government spokeswoman announced on Monday that the meeting would take place on 29 December.

After meeting German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in Jerusalem on Sunday, Netanyahu reiterated that Hamas rule of Gaza had to end and that the armed group had to follow through on “their commitment” to give up their weapons and for the strip to be demilitarised.

Later, when addressing a gathering of Israeli ambassadors and diplomats, he expressed scepticism about whether a planned multinational force would be able to disarm Hamas.

“Now there is a question here: our friends in America want to try to establish an international force that will do the job. I said – please. Are there volunteers here? Please, on the contrary,” Netanyahu said, seemingly questioning whether foreign troops would be willing to disarm Hamas by force.

“And we know that there are certain tasks that this force can do. I don’t want to go into detail, they can’t do everything, and maybe they can’t do the main thing, but we’ll see.”

He went on to reiterate that Israel would ensure disarmament would happen, saying: “It can be done the easy way, it can be done the hard way. But eventually it will be done.”

Speaking to the Associated Press, a top Hamas official, Bassem Naim, said his group was ready for talks on “freezing or storing” its arsenal of weapons in a possible approach to one of the most challenging issues ahead.

“We are open to have a comprehensive approach in order to avoid further escalations or in order to avoid any further clashes or explosions,” Naim – a member of the Hamas political bureau – said in an interview in Qatar, where much of the group’s leadership is based.

Hamas has previously refused to give up its weapons without the creation of an independent Palestinian state.

Naim also claimed that Israel had failed to carry out key ceasefire pledges, saying Gaza had not been flooded with aid and the Rafah border crossing with Egypt had not reopened.

Humanitarian agencies say there has been a dramatic increase in supplies entering the strip, but that they are still facing Israeli restrictions on their work and insecurity.

Last week, Israel said it was ready to reopen Rafah – Gaza’s main gateway to the world – but only for people to leave. Egypt and the Palestinians did not accept that and insisted that Israel was obliged to open the crossing in both directions.

The ceasefire deal stopped a devastating two-year Israeli offensive in Gaza, triggered by the deadly Hamas attacks and mass hostage taking in southern Israel.

The first stage of the peace plan involved the return of the 20 living hostages and the remains of the 28 dead hostages still in Gaza. In exchange for the release of the living hostages, Israel handed over nearly 2,000 Palestinian detainees. For each of the Israeli hostages handed over, Israel has been sending back the bodies of 15 Palestinians.

Israel has accused Hamas of delaying the return of dead hostages.

The Hamas-run health ministry in Gaza says that more than 370 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli fire since the ceasefire took hold.

Israel says its strikes have been in response to Palestinian violations, including people entering Israeli-held parts of Gaza.

Three Israeli soldiers have also been killed in fighting with dozens of Hamas operatives still said to be holed up in underground tunnels in the very south of Gaza.

Last week, Trump said that the second phase of the Gaza plan was “going to happen pretty soon”, and on Saturday, the Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdul Rahman Al Thani said that “a critical moment” had been reached.

Israeli police accompanied by municipal officials forcibly entered the facility, UNRWA Commissioner-General Philippe Lazzarini wrote on the social media platform X.

Police motorcycles, trucks and forklifts were brought in and all communications were cut, he said, while furniture, IT equipment and other property were seized. 

The UN flag was pulled down and replaced with an Israeli flag.

Israel urged to recognise UN immunity

UN Secretary-General António Guterres issued a statement strongly condemning the unauthorised entry.

“This compound remains United Nations premises and is inviolable and immune from any other form of interference,” he said.

“I urge Israel to immediately take all necessary steps to restore, preserve and uphold the inviolability of UNRWA premises and to refrain from taking any further action with regard to UNRWA premises, in line with its obligations under the Charter of the United Nations and its other obligations under international law.”

‘Blatant disregard’

“This latest action represents a blatant disregard of Israel’s obligation as a United Nations Member State to protect and respect the inviolability of UN premises,” Mr. Lazzarini said.

“To allow this represents a new challenge to international law, one that creates a dangerous precedent anywhere else the UN is present across the world.”

UNRWA provides health, education and other services to roughly six million Palestine refugees in five locations in the Middle East, including the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

The agency has come under attack following the latest hostilities in Gaza, which began after the deadly 7 October 2023 Hamas-led assault on Israel.

Mr. Lazzarini said the East Jerusalem compound has been vacant since the beginning of the year after the Israeli parliament passed “anti-UNRWA legislation”.  Read more about the laws here.

This was preceded by months of harassment, including arson attacks in 2024, as well as hateful demonstrations and intimidation, supported by a large-scale disinformation campaign.

UN premises are inviolable

“However, whatever action taken domestically, the compound retains its status as a UN premises, immune from any form of interference,” the UNRWA chief said.

Israel is a party to the Convention on the Privileges & Immunities of the UN – the international treaty that “makes UN premises inviolable – in other words, immune from search and/or seizure – and makes UN property and assets immune from legal process,” he said.

He added that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) “has also underscored that Israel is obliged to cooperate with UNRWA and other UN agencies.”