Middle East
Four BCG employees quit controversial Gaza aid project in its early stages
Four employees of Boston Consulting Group (BCG) left the team advising on a new aid system for Gaza during the project’s initial stages. It has emerged that the employees voiced their concerns months before the project escalated into a reputational crisis for the firm.
BCG was a contractor for the Israeli-US-led Gaza Humanitarian Fund (GHF) initiative, during which hundreds of Palestinians were killed, and was reportedly involved in “modeling” a plan to deport Palestinians to Somalia and Somaliland.
According to sources who spoke to the Financial Times (FT), these resignations have become a focal point for investigators examining BCG’s procedural irregularities. The firm stated that the partners managing the project “covered up” the reasons for the team members’ departures.
BCG worked for seven months to help establish the Gaza Humanitarian Fund (GHF), an Israeli-backed food distribution plan that replaced traditional United Nations (UN)-led aid efforts and drew international condemnation.
BCG management halted the project in May, on the eve of the GHF becoming operational. The leadership announced that the responsible US partners had bypassed official approval processes and misled their superiors.
The first team resigned in one day
Sources familiar with the project’s early phases said that three US personnel assigned to the project decided to leave just one day after joining.
Sources who spoke with these three individuals stated that the personnel expressed concerns about the need for coordination with Israeli authorities, among other reservations.
The work, which BCG codenamed “Project Aurora,” was restarted with a different team formed from the firm’s US defense unit.
According to sources, a member of this new team also resigned just a few weeks after starting, citing discomfort with the use of private security contractors with military backgrounds and doubts about the project’s viability.
During this early period, the BCG team discussed the reputational risk of working with private security contractors and the potential problems if the GHF failed to secure broad support.
A US military veteran who was a consultant on the team prepared a list of these concerns at the request of the managing partner and left the project shortly thereafter.
Law firm investigates the resignations
These four early departures and the list of concerns were reviewed by the law firm WilmerHale, which was commissioned by BCG to investigate Project Aurora.
The firm’s lawyers reportedly asked whether the issues raised had been properly addressed.
In a statement, BCG said, “Our involvement in the work in Gaza was the result of deliberate individual misconduct, including the cover-up of the reasons for the team’s departure.”
The statement added, “We have launched a firm-wide effort to ensure our controls are not bypassed and to strengthen our culture of speaking up.”
Aid organizations cited a ‘violation of principles’
The GHF was rejected by leading aid groups for violating the principles of humanitarian independence and was condemned by the UN for assisting Israel’s war aims.
The fund’s few distribution points reportedly failed to alleviate fears of starvation in the region, and hundreds of Palestinians were killed while attempting to receive food.
BCG maintains it is committed to being apolitical and upholding humanitarian principles, arguing that the two partners on the project falsely claimed the GHF had broad multilateral support.
According to sources, the partners created “safeguards” around the project, such as prohibiting travel to Gaza and promising not to include personnel from BCG’s Middle East or Israel offices.
In June, BCG fired the two partners, and two senior executives who were aware of the project also stepped down from their administrative roles.
According to the Financial Times, the BCG team also created a financial model for post-war Gaza for Israeli businesspeople who were helping develop the GHF.
This model estimated the costs and economic impact of deporting hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to other countries, including Somalia.
Many aid organizations that have previously worked with BCG have suspended their partnerships pending the outcome of the WilmerHale investigation.
BCG CEO Christoph Schweizer called the incident “deeply painful and extremely disappointing.”
BCG approved multiple projects related to Gaza after the war began.
One consulting team worked with Fogbow, a private company founded by US military veterans, and a related charitable foundation that aimed to deliver aid to the region by sea from Cyprus.
The consulting firm also submitted a proposal to UNRWA, the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, to help organize its aid and fundraising efforts for Palestine, but no work was agreed upon.
Middle East
UNDP estimates $1.38 billion in building damage across southern Lebanon
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and Lebanon’s National Council for Scientific Research have released a rapid assessment report on building damage in southern Lebanon.
According to Lebanon’s Al-Akhbar newspaper, the study relied on satellite imagery and geospatial artificial intelligence (GeoAI) technologies to assess externally visible damage to buildings along the southern border between October 23, 2025, and April 29, 2026.
The report found that a total of 11,095 buildings had been completely destroyed in the areas surveyed. Based on an assumed average apartment size of 150 square metres, these destroyed structures are estimated to correspond theoretically to 17,891 housing units.
The volume of debris generated in the region is estimated at 3,107,756 cubic metres.
In addition to the buildings that were completely destroyed, the assessment identified partial damage to 2,242 buildings and minor damage to 9,311 others.
At the housing-unit level, the report estimates that alongside the approximately 17,891 units that were completely destroyed, around 5,219 homes sustained partial damage and 18,282 suffered minor damage.
The report stressed that these housing figures are not based on direct field surveys but on mathematical modelling using average floor-space assumptions and therefore constitute theoretical estimates.
Preliminary cost of building damage estimated at $1.38 billion
The report calculated reconstruction costs using a standard benchmark value of $450 per square metre. On that basis, the total preliminary cost of building damage was estimated at $1.384 billion.
Geographically, Nabatieh Governorate accounted for the largest share of the damage, estimated at $1.053 billion, while losses in South Governorate were assessed at $331 million.
At the district level, preliminary costs were estimated at $688 million in Bint Jbeil, $333 million in Marjayoun, $315 million in Tyre, $32 million in Nabatieh district and $16 million in Sidon.
The report emphasised that these figures cover only external physical damage to buildings and do not represent the final cost of reconstruction or the total economic losses caused by the war.
In Bint Jbeil district, the highest levels of destruction were recorded in Aitaroun, where 1,658 buildings were destroyed, followed by Bint Jbeil city with 1,076, Ayta al-Shaab with 539, Beit Lif with 371, Yaroun with 242 and Ainata with 227.
In Marjayoun district, 969 destroyed buildings were recorded in Mais al-Jabal, 824 in Taybeh, 285 in Houla, 199 in Markaba, 184 in Blida and 174 in Deir Siryan.
In Nabatieh district, 71 buildings were destroyed in Yahmar al-Shaqif, 69 in Zoutar al-Sharqiya and 37 in Kfar Sir. In Tyre district, 370 buildings were completely destroyed in Burj al-Shamali, 216 in Naqoura, 162 in Abbassiyeh, 80 in Tyre city and 65 in al-Mansouri. In Sidon district, destruction was concentrated mainly in Zirariyeh, where 65 buildings were destroyed, and Arzi, where 62 buildings were levelled.
The report also outlined significant limitations that prevent the findings from being treated as a definitive final assessment.
The study did not cover entire administrative districts but was limited to areas where clear satellite imagery was available.
As a result, the area south of the Litani River constituted the main focus, while only limited data from areas north of the river were included. Some municipalities were fully surveyed, while only selected sections of others could be examined.
For example, all cadastral zones in Bint Jbeil district were surveyed. In Tyre district, 74 of 75 cadastral areas were fully covered, while one was only partially included.
In Marjayoun, 17 of 33 areas were fully surveyed and 21 partially covered. In Nabatieh, only four of 52 areas were fully analysed, while 15 were partially examined. In Sidon, none of the 77 areas underwent a complete survey, with only five areas partially included in the assessment.
The report listed several additional limitations:
Critical infrastructure damage, including roads, bridges, electricity networks, water systems and telecommunications facilities, was not assessed.
Damage to underground shelters, basements and non-visible interior sections of buildings could not be detected.
No clear distinction could be made between residential, commercial and industrial structures.
Buildings with minor damage were excluded from debris-volume and cost calculations.
Structural density, shadows and narrow streets introduced potential margins of error in satellite analysis.
No field visits or on-site inspections were conducted to verify the findings. The assessment was carried out entirely through desk-based analysis of satellite imagery.
Given the scale of destruction and confidence in the methodology employed, no on-site verification procedures were undertaken in cooperation with the Lebanese Armed Forces or the United Nations Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS).
UNDP said the findings should be regarded as preliminary planning data and that the scope of the assessment would be expanded as additional satellite imagery and field information become available.
Officials noted that once excluded categories and infrastructure losses are taken into account, the true cost of the destruction in southern Lebanon is likely to be significantly higher than the estimates contained in the report.
Middle East
Iran makes Lebanon ceasefire prerequisite for final agreement with US
Assessments that efforts to restrain Israel in Lebanon are being shaped less in Beirut or Tel Aviv than in closed-door talks between Iranian and American negotiators resurfaced ahead of negotiations in the Swiss town of Bürgenstock.
Unlike the current approach adopted by the Lebanese government, Iran continues to pursue a strategy of leveraging its influence on the ground to secure diplomatic gains.
The Lebanese government, meanwhile, remains committed to a separate negotiating track that critics say facilitates concessions to Israel at the negotiating table in Washington that could not be achieved on the battlefield.
US Vice President JD Vance, who arrived in Switzerland to participate in the latest round of talks, confirmed that efforts to make the ceasefire in Lebanon permanent would be among the negotiations’ top priorities.
According to CNN, citing a diplomatic source familiar with the matter, the US and Iranian delegations agreed to convene an emergency session on the situation in Lebanon as the first item of discussion, placing the issue at the top of the agenda.
US says it faces difficulties over Israeli withdrawal
According to diplomatic sources cited by Al-Akhbar newspaper, US officials informed the Iranian side that Washington had made intensive efforts to persuade the Israeli government to complete a full withdrawal from Lebanon but had encountered significant difficulties in the process.
US officials requested Iranian support in facilitating Hezbollah’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon as part of efforts to enable an Israeli pullout.
The Iranian delegation responded that Hezbollah was an internal Lebanese matter. While indicating that Tehran did not oppose an agreement by the Lebanese authorities on a timetable providing for a rapid Israeli withdrawal, the delegation outlined what it viewed as its own area of responsibility.
Iranian representatives said both Tehran and Washington had committed to implementing measures aimed at ending the war across the region, including in Lebanon, and argued that the United States should exert pressure on Israel not only to uphold a ceasefire but also to withdraw quickly.
Iran reiterates Lebanon condition for final agreement
An Iranian official also told CNN that ending the conflict in Lebanon was the most important item on the Iranian delegation’s agenda.
During the talks, Vice President Vance said Washington would continue working toward peace between Lebanon and Israel and expressed hope that the temporary ceasefire could be transformed into a permanent agreement capable of delivering long-term stability.
Speaking before the session, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said Tehran would not begin negotiations on a final agreement with Washington unless the war in Lebanon was halted, as stipulated in the US-Iran memorandum of understanding.
In a post on X, Baghaei wrote: “It is not possible to move to the negotiation stage for a final agreement unless these provisions are implemented, foremost among them the first clause, which calls for ending the war on all fronts, including Lebanon.”
Military and diplomatic developments ahead of the Bürgenstock talks threatened to undermine the understanding reached between the parties. Following Israeli attacks in Lebanon and what Iran described as an escalation of military tensions in violation of the US-Iran agreement, Tehran announced that it had closed the Strait of Hormuz to traffic.
In a statement, Iran’s Khatam al-Anbiya Headquarters said the closure of the strait was only the first step in a series of measures planned by Tehran. Iran’s Foreign Ministry subsequently announced the suspension of the Geneva negotiations with the United States.
Following those developments, reports indicated that Washington intervened and increased pressure on Israel, leading Israeli military commanders to issue definitive orders for a complete halt to military operations in southern Lebanon for the second time within 24 hours.
Israeli media reports said the decision was not taken solely on Tel Aviv’s own initiative and that military operations were curtailed as a result of intense US pressure following Iran’s move in the Strait of Hormuz.
Middle East
US lifts naval blockade of Iran after ceasefire memorandum signed
The United States has lifted its naval blockade of Iran on the orders of President Donald Trump, ending restrictions on vessels entering and leaving Iranian ports.
Announcing the development, the US Central Command (CENTCOM) said the US military was no longer blocking maritime traffic to Iranian ports and had halted all operations related to enforcing the naval blockade.
The statement added that US warships would remain in the region to monitor compliance with the terms of the agreement.
The decision to lift the blockade follows the memorandum of understanding signed by the United States and Iran on June 18, aimed at ending the war and reopening the Strait of Hormuz to maritime traffic.
After signing the document in France, where he was attending the G7 summit, Trump sent the agreement to Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian for approval.
In a statement, Iran’s Foreign Ministry said a formal signing ceremony between the two delegations, previously scheduled to take place in Geneva on June 19, would no longer be held.
Negotiations to continue in Switzerland
According to Axios, citing sources familiar with the matter, the signing process for the memorandum of understanding was accelerated in order to reopen the Strait of Hormuz to shipping as quickly as possible.
A planned meeting between US and Iranian representatives in Switzerland has not been cancelled. The talks are expected to focus on launching negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme, with US Vice President James David Vance and Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf set to take part.
According to CNN, the 14-point memorandum calls for an immediate ceasefire on all fronts, the lifting of the naval blockade, the resumption of maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, the removal of oil sanctions on Iran and the withdrawal of US troops from areas surrounding Iran.
The agreement also includes the allocation of $300 billion for Iran’s economic reconstruction, the release of $24 billion in frozen Iranian assets and a 60-day negotiation process aimed at reaching a final agreement on the nuclear programme.
In return, the authorities in Tehran pledged not to develop nuclear weapons.
-
Europe2 weeks agoAfD says Ukraine should compensate Germany over Nord Stream sabotage
-
Opinion1 week agoA voice rising from New Delhi: BRICS’s manifesto for a new world order
-
Middle East1 week agoMine clearing in Strait of Hormuz could delay shipping traffic for up to 50 days
-
America1 week agoData leak exposes Peter Thiel’s secret ‘Dialog’ network of politicians, regulators, and tech elites
-
Europe2 weeks agoToyota and JLR warn EU ‘Made in Europe’ rules could threaten jobs and investment
-
Russia1 week agoPatrushev urges assertive Russian naval presence to counter NATO encirclement strategy
-
Diplomacy1 week agoIran discloses 14-point draft US peace accord detailing sanctions relief, regional security measures
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoSpaceX IPO raises concerns over European capital outflows and telecom competition
