Connect with us

Middle East

Four BCG employees quit controversial Gaza aid project in its early stages

Published

on

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

US warns Gulf allies of possible Iran strikes after midterms

Published

on

The US administration has notified several Gulf allies that it could launch a short but intensive military campaign against Iran immediately following the congressional midterm elections on 3 November. Washington urged regional states to prepare for this contingency.

According to a Wall Street Journal report citing sources with direct knowledge of the discussions, the warning did not specify which countries were briefed. Meanwhile, military activity on the ground has accelerated alongside these disclosures.

The US military has deployed a Patriot air defence battery from Texas to the Middle East, while beginning to pull its personnel back from exposed bases within range of Iranian ballistic missiles and drones to more secure positions. These moves reinforce indications that the US and Israel are preparing for a direct, wide-scale confrontation with Tehran.

The White House declined to comment on sensitive military plans whose existence has not been officially confirmed. An official statement emphasized, however, that President Donald Trump keeps all options on the table to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

The New York Times reported last week that US and Israeli armed forces have stepped up joint military drills based on a short but intensive operational scenario. Potential targets identified by the newspaper include Iran’s nuclear facilities, critical energy infrastructure, and production centres for missiles and armed unmanned aerial vehicles.

The same report noted that while seen as an unlikely outcome, Trump could approve the operation before the end of October, though he might also opt against authorizing any military action. In recent months, Trump has repeatedly suspended decisions to re-enter active hostilities at the last moment.

The current active conflict between the two nations was triggered on 28 February by a joint US-Israeli strike on Iranian targets. Trump explained the primary rationale for the operation as ensuring that Tehran can under no circumstances attain a nuclear weapon.

These military actions follow the 12-day war fought in June 2025. During that air campaign, Washington directly targeted and struck Iran’s primary nuclear installations at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan.

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi outlined the latest situation on the ground during an address to the UN Security Council. Grossi stated that the agency has found no evidence indicating that Tehran is repairing or rebuilding from scratch the nuclear infrastructure damaged in the 2025 and 2026 strikes.

Criticizing the continued exclusion of monitors, Grossi urged Iran to grant international inspectors immediate access to all its nuclear sites, including damaged locations. Since the US bombardment in June 2025, the IAEA has been unable to independently verify the current status of Tehran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium.

According to official agency records, Iran held 440.9 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60% purity prior to the June 2025 war. In nuclear physics, 60% enrichment is technically regarded as exceptionally close to the roughly 90% threshold required for weapons grade.

Following the bombings, Tehran barred international inspectors from entering the struck facilities. Because of this restriction, the regulatory body cannot ascertain how much of this critical stockpile remains intact or where it is currently stored.

Mounting military costs fuel domestic political pressure

President Trump maintains that the June 2025 air strikes demolished Iran’s nuclear capabilities. Nevertheless, the prolonged military operations have destabilized economic conditions, and soaring domestic fuel prices in particular are placing the governing Republican Party under severe political strain ahead of the midterms.

Trump has pushed back against criticism over rising energy costs, arguing that absorbing higher prices at the pump is necessary to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear arms.

Pentagon budget records reviewed by Reuters indicate that total US military spending on the Iran conflict has surpassed $47 billion. This figure stands 25% above official estimates released by defence officials in July.

The largest portion of total expenditures, $29 billion, was allocated to replenishing depleted munitions stocks, while $6 billion went toward replacing worn military hardware. It remains unclear whether repair bills for US bases damaged by retaliatory Iranian missile and kamikaze drone strikes are included in this official $47 billion sum.

Continue Reading

Middle East

US military operations against Iran reach $47 billion

Published

on

The total cost of US military operations against Iran has reached $47 billion.

According to a report by the American newspaper The Hill, citing an assessment by US Central Command (CENTCOM), the operation’s budget grew by more than $3 billion in the past month alone.

A detailed breakdown of the spending appears in a document prepared by the command. The largest share of the budget is accounted for by munitions shipments, totalling $29 billion.

Additional expenses arising directly from conducting the military operation stand at approximately $12 billion, whilst replacing lost military equipment and gear requires $6.1 billion.

Funding allocated to support military personnel deployed to the region, air transport, communications, and transport operations within the operational theatre is calculated at $7.6 billion.

Moreover, this overall total does not include the expenditure required to repair and rebuild US military bases in the Middle East.

According to information reported by The Hill, US President Donald Trump is weighing the possibility of launching fresh strikes against Iran following the country’s midterm elections.

Trump had previously described the military operation against Iran as one of the best decisions of his presidency.

Congress steps in as budget deficit deepens

The bill for the operation climbed swiftly in a short period. In a statement on 22 July, US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth announced that the cost of the Iran campaign had reached $37.5 billion.

Hegseth noted that the figure covered both expenses already incurred and projected spending through the end of the fiscal year on 30 September.

A day before Hegseth’s statement, The Washington Post reported that the Pentagon was facing a severe cash crunch due to the war with Iran.

The newspaper reported that the White House had requested an emergency supplemental appropriation of $67 billion from Congress to cover military expenses, warning that the military would be forced to cut other spending items if the request were rejected.

Following these developments, the House of Representatives approved a $1.15 trillion defence budget.

The relevant resolution includes allocating $73 billion in additional funding to the Pentagon and intelligence agencies, primarily to cover the costs of the war being waged with Iran.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Over 3,000 Palestinians displaced as Israel’s Hebron siege hits day 5

Published

on

The Israeli army’s siege of the city of Hebron in the occupied West Bank has entered its fifth day. More than 3,000 Palestinians have been forced to flee their homes as raids, house demolitions, and forced evictions continue across the city.

According to data shared by Hebron Municipality on 26 October, the number of displaced people has reached 3,189. More than 200 of them are infants.

Municipal authorities announced that roughly half of the total displaced population consists of children and youths under the age of 18.

Palestinian officials in the besieged city declared a state of emergency and established an urgent crisis desk.

Rami Khamis, a member of the crisis desk, highlighted civic solidarity in remarks to Al Jazeera, saying local residents and benefactors who refused to let their fellow citizens stay in temporary shelters opened their homes to displaced families.

A Palestinian forced to abandon his home in haste recounted his ordeal to Al Jazeera on 26 October.

Explaining that they fled with only the clothes on their backs, the resident said their savings, household goods, and official documents were left behind. After placing his family in a relatively safe place, he attempted to return to salvage their belongings, but could not reach the house because the area was no longer safe.

The siege began immediately after an attack on 23 October in which two Israeli soldiers were killed. The two Palestinians who carried out the assault were killed at the scene by Israeli forces.

Citing this incident, the Israeli army blockaded the city and launched wide-ranging operations. The British newspaper The Guardian described the measures carried out in Hebron as “collective punishment”.

Hamas official Mahmoud Mardawi also condemned both the siege in Hebron and the military incursions spreading across the occupied West Bank in a statement on 26 October.

Emphasising that these steps constitute collective punishment, Mardawi warned that escalating tensions on the ground could lead to grave consequences.

Mardawi further argued that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government are using these attacks for propaganda and electoral calculations, stating that military pressure will not break Palestinian resilience and that calculations regarding annexation and mass expulsion will fail to achieve their goal.

Operation rift in Israeli leadership

As the blockade entered its fifth day, a divergence of opinion emerged between Israel’s military brass and the government.

According to a report in the Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper, Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu clashed over the future of the operation.

Zamir argued that the military campaign on the ground had delivered whatever benefit it could provide and that it was now time to bring it to an end.

Military officials said tangible gains achieved throughout the operation remained limited, indicating that whether to sustain the current push required reassessment.

Indeed, the newspaper reported that Israeli forces managed to seize only a limited number of weapons in the city, failing to uncover any unusual arsenals or major arms caches.

However, Chief of Staff Zamir’s proposal to end the operation was rejected. Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Defence Minister dismissed the recommendation and decided to continue the offensive.

At least 70 Palestinians have been detained in Hebron since the siege and operations began. The Israeli army is also continuing extensive demolition activities targeting civilian homes across the city.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey