Follow us on social

google cta
Contractors Gaza

Are armed American mercs surging into new Gaza aid sites?

Whistleblower Anthony Aguilar claims that a new company is already hoping to take over where the notorious Gaza Humanitarian Foundation left off

Reporting | Middle East
google cta

The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation officially closed up shop this week, just six months after it launched. The news came as something of a relief to the organization’s myriad critics, who argued that its privatized approach to aid distribution had contributed to the deaths of some 2,000 Palestinians.

For now, this means that aid in Gaza is being handled by the United Nations and other NGOs with long experience in the field, in coordination with the U.S.-led Civil-Military Coordination Center. But private contractors aren’t quite ready to throw in the towel yet.

One such contractor is UG Solutions, a private company that provided armed security at GHF aid distribution points. UGS drew harsh criticism for this work, particularly following a series of allegations from former Green Beret and UGS contractor Anthony Aguilar, who claimed that he saw other contractors commit war crimes during his deployment to Gaza. Further harming the organization’s reputation was the revelation that it had sent at least 10 members of an anti-Muslim biker gang to work security in Gaza.

Undeterred by these controversies, UGS is already staffing up for new deployments at up to 15 aid sites in Gaza starting in December, according to Drop Site. And UGS isn’t the only contractor angling for a role in post-war Gaza. As Drop Site noted, a consulting company called Q2IMPACT has also received a $7 million U.S. contract to “monitor the efficacy of humanitarian aid in Palestine and Lebanon.”

Aguilar told RS that he believes Q2IMPACT is now taking over for the work of the GHF and Safe Reach Solutions, which had coordinated private aid with the U.S. and Israeli governments. “The intent of the privatized aid mechanism under GHF, now under Q2IMPACT and UGS, is to displace the population, establish precursors to kill unarmed civilians, and implement systematic starvation under the guise of humanitarian aid,” he said.

UGS said it is unaware of any new companies contracted to do “humanitarian or logistics work in Gaza” at the moment. “UG Solutions has not been retained by Q2IMPACT nor has had any conversations with the firm, though we are open to discussions with them,” a company spokesperson told RS. UGS also rejected allegations that its contractors had committed war crimes, accusing Aguilar of peddling “the same tired claims which have been rebuked on many occasions in hopes of remaining somehow relevant.”

The State Department, for its part, denied any intention of returning to privatized aid operations and accused Aguilar of “lying.” When asked to clarify what role Q2IMPACT will play in aid distribution, the department did not respond. Q2IMPACT did not respond to a request for comment.

Regardless of Q2IMPACT’s potential role, the return of UGS should be a major cause for concern, Aguilar told RS. The former Green Beret said that, before deploying to Gaza, he and other recruits “received absolutely no training whatsoever.” He alleged that UGS “did not confirm the credentials or abilities of the security guards they hired” in previous rounds of recruiting, adding that the company lacks the resources to “train security personnel at scale to deal with the complexities of the Humanitarian Crisis in Gaza.”

UGS denied all of these claims and said its recruits go through a “Humanitarian Security Officer vetting course” involving shooting evaluations and classroom instruction on international law.

Lurking behind this discussion is a broad sense of uncertainty over what the governance of post-war Gaza will look like, assuming that recent Israeli escalations don’t spark a return to open conflict.

The U.S. is now publicly discussing the possibility of building temporary towns of “vetted” Palestinians inside Israeli-controlled portions of Gaza, which they refer to as “alternative safe communities.” Under this plan, roughly half of Gaza would be left in ruins unless Hamas fully surrenders.

It is unclear whether these plans have any relation to the new aid distribution points that UGS is reportedly staffing up for. But they raise similar questions about the role of U.S. and Israeli officials and contractors. Aid experts say relief operations must adhere to strict rules of neutrality or risk putting aid seekers in danger. The very involvement of foreign contractors or Israeli soldiers in aid efforts increases the risk of violent incidents, like those that occurred repeatedly during the GHF’s brief tenure in Gaza.

Private groups like the GHF offer an “enticing proposition” to governments looking for a non-neutral alternative to typical aid organizations, wrote Scott Paul of Oxfam. “But as the failure of the GHF demonstrated, the essential ingredients for humanitarian assistance are not trucks and guns,” Paul continued. “They are the trust of communities, a deep understanding of how crisis shapes what people do and need, a steadfast determination to keep people safe and treat them with dignity, and an uncompromising commitment to avoid being instrumentalized for political or military agendas.”


Top Image Credit: Straight Arrow News: Nearly 100 US Special Forces vets hired to operate key checkpoints in Gaza (YouTube/Screenshot)
American security contractors walking thin line in Gaza
Reporting | Middle East
Starmer, Macron, Merz G7
Top photo credit: Prime Minister Keir Starmer meets Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and António Costa, President of the European Council at the G7 world leaders summit in Kananaskis, June 15, 2025. Picture by Simon Dawson / No 10 Downing Street

The Europeans pushing the NATO poison pill

Europe

The recent flurry of diplomatic activity surrounding Ukraine has revealed a stark transatlantic divide. While high level American and Ukrainian officials have been negotiating the U.S. peace plan in Geneva, European powers have been scrambling to influence a process from which they risk being sidelined.

While Europe has to be eventually involved in a settlement of the biggest war on its territory after World War II, so far it’s been acting more like a spoiler than a constructive player.

keep reading Show less
Sudan
Top image credit: A Sudanese army soldier stands next to a destroyed combat vehicle as Sudan's army retakes ground and some displaced residents return to ravaged capital in the state of Khartoum Sudan March 26, 2025. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig
Will Sudan attack the UAE?

Saudi leans in hard to get UAE out of Sudan civil war

Middle East

As Saudi Arabia’s powerful crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), swept through Washington last week, the agenda was predictably packed with deals: a trillion-dollar investment pledge, access to advanced F-35 fighter jets, and coveted American AI technology dominated the headlines. Yet tucked within these transactions was a significant development for the civil war in Sudan.

Speaking at the U.S.-Saudi Investment Forum President Donald Trump said that Sudan “was not on my charts,” viewing the conflict as “just something that was crazy and out of control” until the Saudi leader pressed the issue. “His majesty would like me to do something very powerful having to do with Sudan,” Trump recounted, adding that MBS framed it as an opportunity for greatness.

The crown prince’s intervention highlights a crucial new reality that the path to peace, or continued war, in Sudan now runs even more directly through the escalating rivalry between Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The fate of Sudan is being forged in the Gulf, and its future will be decided by which side has more sway in Trump’s White House.

keep reading Show less
US foreign policy
Top photo credit: A political cartoon portrays the disagreement between President William McKinley and Joseph Pulitzer, who worried the U.S. was growing too large through foreign conquests and land acquisitions. (Puck magazine/Creative Commons)

What does US ‘national interest’ really mean?

Washington Politics

In foreign policy discourse, the phrase “the national interest” gets used with an almost ubiquitous frequency, which could lead one to assume it is a strongly defined and absolute term.

Most debates, particularly around changing course in diplomatic strategy or advocating for or against some kind of economic or military intervention, invoke the phrase as justification for their recommended path forward.

keep reading Show less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.