Retired American military officers and intelligence veterans are at the center of a growing global controversy as for-profit U.S. firms deliver humanitarian aid in conflict zones like South Sudan and Gaza, a move that has raised concerns among international aid organizations about the growing militarization and politicization of humanitarian assistance. Led by companies such as Fogbow and Safe Reach Solutions, these operations are being carried out with the backing of the South Sudanese and Israeli governments, respectively, and are blurring the lines between military, government, and humanitarian aid efforts.
In South Sudan, the Fogbow company, led by former CIA official Michael Mulroy and advised by ex-UN World Food Program head David Beasley has been conducting food airdrops in areas devastated by conflict, including the recent delivery of 16 tons of beans, corn, and salt to the town of Nasir in Upper Nile state. The operation, which Fogbow says is fully funded by the South Sudanese government, took place near ongoing battles between government forces and opposition militias. Critics, including Oxfam America, have warned that these militarized logistics efforts lack transparency, neutrality, and independent humanitarian oversight core principles essential for safe and effective aid delivery in war zones.
Meanwhile, in the Gaza Strip, Safe Reach Solutions another private firm led by former U.S. security and intelligence officers, has partnered with the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation to deliver food packages, amid a humanitarian collapse caused by ongoing Israeli military operations and severe access restrictions. These aid distributions are reportedly being used to encourage the relocation of Gaza’s population to the southern region, aligning with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s controversial plan to concentrate civilians in the south while expanding military operations elsewhere. Local health authorities report that hundreds of Palestinians have been killed or injured in recent weeks during chaotic and sometimes deadly attempts to access aid.
The new aid model is being met with deep skepticism by humanitarian agencies and civil society groups, who argue that such arrangements give combatant governments undue control over food supplies potentially using them as tools of war or leverage over vulnerable populations. Edmund Yakani, head of the South Sudanese civil group Community Empowerment for Progress Organization, warned, “We don’t want to see a humanitarian space being abused by military actors under the cover of a food drop.”
Although Fogbow insists its missions are civilian-focused and coordinated to avoid misuse, the UN’s World Food Program (WFP) has officially distanced itself from the company’s South Sudan operations. WFP Country Director Mary-Ellen McGroarty stated, “WFP is not involved in the planning, targeting or distribution of food air-dropped by Fogbow on behalf of South Sudan’s government,” citing concerns about adherence to humanitarian standards.
Funding for the Gaza operations remains murky. While Israel has endorsed the new aid system partly to sideline traditional UN-led deliveries, which it accuses of being compromised by Hamas, no international donor has officially claimed responsibility. The U.S. government has also denied directly funding the Gaza aid program, despite the heavy involvement of American contractors and foundations.
As humanitarian needs in both South Sudan and Gaza escalate due to conflict, displacement, and hunger, the entry of profit-driven, military-aligned actors into the aid space signals a dramatic shift. Aid experts fear it could further undermine trust in humanitarian efforts and endanger civilians caught in the crossfire. The trend also raises broader questions about the future of global aid delivery and whether humanitarian principles can be upheld in an era of increasingly complex geopolitical and security entanglements.
Leave a comment