The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) opened an office in Palestine in 1994. Its website is no longer available to boast about the fact that since then, “it helped 4 million Palestinians live healthier and more productive lives”.

Now that the agency has been shut down by the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump, it is necessary to assess the claims of the US International Development’s military power to benefit the occupied Palestinian territory.

There is no doubt that the closure of the institution has affected Palestinians, especially those who benefit from funding from education and healthcare facilities. Humanitarian regulations have also been affected by the world’s food program interference.

Although the short-term negative impact is obvious, the utility of USDA and other U.S. funds becomes problematic when the greater political context of Israel’s occupation of Palestine is set to take place.

As a researcher, I have been directly and indirectly involved in evaluating U.S.A.-Important Programs funded by the United Nations Development Bank for many years and I have witnessed first-hand how they contribute to maintaining Israel’s career and colonization. As it claims, American institutions are far from “helping” Palestinians live better lives.

Peace Policy

USAID Oslo Agreement 1994.

The so-called “peace process” promised that the Palestinians were an independent state on the land occupied by Israel in 1967, and the final agreement should be signed in 1999. Needless to say, such an agreement has never been signed because Israel has never intended to end peace with the Palestinians and recognize their right to self-certification.

Instead, Oslo was used to conceal Israel’s relentless colonization of the occupied Palestinian territory amid Israeli rhetoric on peace talks. Part of the strategy is the creation of local governing bodies of local governing bodies that manage civil affairs for Palestinians in designated areas.

Although the official Palestinian leadership sees PA as a transitional regime until an independent state is established, it is ultimately design and closely supervised by the United States to serve as a client system, manage and control the occupied population.

To this end, PA is obliged to coordinate closely with Israeli security forces to suppress any form of resistance in its managed territory. Its two main security agencies – Intelligence Services and Preventive Security – set this responsibility.

Although the U.S. intelligence agency is tasked with supporting and training the Palestinian security agencies (which brings together millions of dollars each year), U.S. International Development is tasked with supporting the civilian function of PA.

Between 1994 and 2018, USAID provided more than $5200 million Provide assistance to Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. It funded infrastructure, health and education programs with the goal of winning public support for peace negotiations.

Part of its funding is conducted through civil society organizations, with two main goals: to define the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and to develop a network of civil society actors that will promote this agenda.

The depoliticized framework regards the Palestinian issue as economic and Humanitarian material. This approach solves Palestine’s economic and social problems in isolation – separate from their main cause: Israel’s occupation.

It also seeks to empower Palestinian resistance by calling it the root of instability and chaos rather than a political response to occupation.

To allocate funds, the United States Agency for International Development established a complex background check system with Orwellian conditions. The scope of the review goes beyond the individual’s extended family, the name of the location, and even the cultural context in which the funds are used – none of which can be associated with resistance.

In this case, it is no surprise that the United States Agency for International Development plans often fail to improve the lives of ordinary Palestinians.

Normalization through human-to-human planning

Much of the U.S.A.I.D. has invested much of its money in an initiative to seek to normalize Israel’s colonization by seeking to establish links between Palestinians and Israelis. The premise is that two people “can learn to live together”, which of course completely ignores the reality of segregation and career.

One of the USAID-funded programs I evaluated is the Conflict Management and Mitigation (CMM) program, according to USAID’s Partnership between people frame. By 2018, CMM has allocated more than $230 million to different programs and will allocate another $250 million in 2026.

The program includes projects targeting bereaved parents, farmers and students to promote peace-building. One such project attempts to promote cooperation among Palestinian and Israeli farmers through shared agricultural experience.

During a focus group discussion, I spoke with a Palestinian farmer who explained that Palestinian olive oil production has been stagnant due to the Israeli occupation regime that restricts access to water for Palestinian farmers, in some cases its land. “These plans don’t talk about these issues,” he said.

When I asked him why he participated, he explained that the program allowed him to obtain an Israeli travel permit – allowing him to work on an Israeli farm and earn income to survive.

The absurdity of this dynamic is shocking: on paper, the plan talks about promoting production relations between Palestinians and Israelis, building a common, peaceful future, and farmers becoming friends. But, in fact, Palestinian farmers signed the sign so that they could work on Israeli farms, many of which were established on confiscated Palestinian land. Participating in the program does not address any problems faced by Palestinian farmers in olive cultivation – i.e., Israeli career policy.

Another program I researched, funded by the United States Agency for International Development, is Peace Seed, whose mission is to bring together young people from conflict areas who have the potential to become future leaders of their nations. The central event of the program is a youth summer camp in a wealthy area of ​​Maine, USA, where participants received conversation and leadership training.

The two largest players are Israelis and Palestinians. Although the Israeli Ministry of Education is responsible for selecting Israeli participants, the seeds of Ramallah’s Peace Office oversee the recruitment of Palestinian participants. Each participant benefits from a heavily subsidized program, cost Up to $8,000 per person.

Over the years, careful study of participants’ lists has shown a stunning pattern: PA leaders and sons and daughters of wealthy families often appear.

Curious about this model, I once asked a plan official. The response revealed: “In Palestinian society, leadership is often passed on to the children of senior officials.”

This means that the organization’s political power is hereditary, and therefore, the organization’s political leadership vision assumes that it is hereditary, and therefore, the American initiative should focus on the sons and daughters of the current elite.

Political intervention

Peace Seeds so far isn’t the only plan to support PA Cadres and their family. Relatives of some senior officials received preferential treatment for lucrative U.S.A.D. contracts; others led nonprofits funded by the agency.

USAID has also indirectly participated in the Palestine political arena by supporting Washington’s favored political players.

Between 2004 and 2006, it implemented a broad democratic promotion program in the Palestinian territory under its leadership in the 2006 legislative elections. Although there is no direct evidence of financial support for a list of specific candidates or political parties, observers point out that civil society organizations (CSOs) or candidates associated with Fatah are the third method of funding by the United States Agency for International Development. In some cases, this support is carried out through organizations operating in unrelated departments.

Despite the substantial financial and political support, these groups have not obtained enough seats to prevent Hamas’ election victory. After Hamas controls Gaza, U.S. International Development continues to support Palestinian civil society organizations, in some cases, significantly increasing their funding.

The same is true for USAID support this police In the case of PA passing the Rule of Law Program, although most of the funds of PA’s suppressed security agencies have been passed through the CIA of the U.S. Department of State and the International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE).

The latest and distinctive examples of USDA participation are Fault The dock built by the U.S. military in 2024 to facilitate aid delivery to Gaza at a cost of $230m. The project was promoted as a humanitarian initiative, and the United States Agency for International Development is one of the organizations responsible for distributing assistance to Didi.

In fact, the dock is a public relations stunt by former U.S. President Joe Biden’s administration to cover up our accomplices in Israel’s lockdown on Gaza. The Israeli military also used the operation, resulting in the killing of more than 200 Palestinians, raising serious questions about the militarization and abuse of aid infrastructure.

The Pier Fallen is a great example of the United States’ approach to aid Palestinians: this has never been done in their best interests.

Indeed, some poor Palestinians may be affected by the closure of USDA operations in the West Bank and Gaza. However, it is impossible to change the local situation decisively. The cutoff of aid will have a greater impact on the U.S. strategy to leverage Palestinian civil society organizations to promote the peace agenda and perpetuate empty rhetoric about peace.

In this regard, the closure of the United States Agency for International Development could provide Palestinian civil society with opportunities to reconsider its ethical obligations with the Palestinian people and U.S. government donors. Millions of people obviously didn’t work. It is time to adopt a new approach to the interests of the Palestinians.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own views and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Al Jazeera.