Inklings | Gaza, humanitarians, and genocide

This is Inklings, where we explore how aid works in the wilds of humanitarian hubs, on the front lines of emergency response, or in the dark corners of aid punditry.

We’re back, after some time away to conduct an internal humanitarian reset. Reform plans are already under way: Power will be shifted; efficiencies will be gained; meetings will be shortened. Looking for our implementation plan or a reset roadmap? You may have to settle for an infographic.

Inklings is also available as an email newsletter. Subscribe here.

Today: Humanitarian trade shows, genocide, and what an audit shows about exit plans for “deprioritised” countries.

On the radar |

AidEx x Maersk: A.P. Moller – Maersk, the Danish logistics firm, is one of dozens of exhibitors or sponsors at the upcoming AidEx conference in Geneva. It’s also the only one, as far as we can tell, gracing the pages of a recent UN rights report examining the role of corporations in sustaining the Israeli occupation and genocide in Palestine. 

• Logistics: In her June report, UN special rapporteur Francesca Albanese writes: “Shipping companies such as the Danish A.P. Moller – Maersk A/S transport components, parts, weapons and raw materials, sustaining a steady flow of United States-supplied military equipment post-October 2023”. On this point, she cites research by the Palestinian Youth Movement, which said Maersk had shipped millions of kilos of military goods to Israel from September 2023 to September 2024, including parts for armoured personnel carriers, tactical vehicles, aircraft, and projectile systems. Beyond this, Albanese says companies like Maersk are “integral” to the ecosystem that supports Israeli global retail: “For years they have shipped goods from the colonies and [UN human rights] database-listed companies straight to the United States and other markets.”

• What Maersk says: In a statement responding to the Albanese report, Maersk said it has had “a strict policy of not shipping weapons or ammunition to Israel” since “the outset of the conflict between Israel and Hamas”, and that it has ”strengthened our screening and acceptance procedures and implemented additional compliance measures”, including in Israeli settlements. These latter tweaks appear to be referencing changes announced shortly before Albanese’s report was launched. The Palestinian Youth Movement said in June that Maersk appeared to be the first global shipping company to cut ties with Israeli settlements.

• What AidEx says: We emailed the folks at AidEx asking for comments about Maersk’s participation, and the process for vetting exhibitors or sponsors. We haven’t heard back.

• Maersk’s humanitarian collabs: Maersk was accused of shipping military-related goods to Israel as the siege of Gaza escalated after October 2023. At the same time, the company was partnering with humanitarian organisations trying to deliver aid to Gaza. According to the World Economic Forum, Maersk provided 5,000 square metres of warehouse space in Jordan (19 tennis courts, we’re told… or roughly 0.000001 Rhode Islands). This was the origin point for 1,266 aid trucks headed for Gaza; it’s unclear how many Israel allowed in (or what happened to aid seekers or aid workers after). 

Emergency relief is in part a test of logistics, so it should be no surprise that corporations play a role. But as Israel’s starvation of Gaza escalates and evidence of genocide mounts, more humanitarians are also asking what they can or should do. Private companies may dip into humanitarian work, but it doesn’t mean they share humanitarian values – whether that be logistics firms or artificial intelligence companies. The question of how to balance those tensions will grow more pointed as aid cuts escalate.

On humanitarians and genocide: Israel is committing genocide in the Gaza Strip, a UN commission of inquiry said in a legal analysis released on 16 September. Some big aid groups are using the rights report as a prompt (and a reason to utter the G-word a couple times). World leaders must “urgently intervene… to prevent the evisceration of life in the Gaza Strip”, the heads of 22 NGOs said in a 17 September statement. Wording for the statement was being wrangled over right after the release of the UN report, producing a relatively quick turnaround time for these types of things. Has your fave NGO signed on? One notable: Newish Care International executive director Reintje Van Haeringen added her name (it’s been a minute, Care International. Everything OK? 📩).

On Albanese and sanctions: Special rapporteur Albanese says she can’t open a bank account in her home country, Italy, due to US sanctions against her. “It’s incredible the financial hurdle that this is causing to my family,” she told reporters in Geneva this week. “Why do I have to pay with my own life, for what – for having done my job?” Albanese appeared reluctant to talk about the personal impacts of the sanctions. She asked that the UN and regional groups “stand firmly against this” – the European Union could take measures to block the reach of sanctions, but so far has not. “Don't let this become a precedent, because it's not going to be limited to me,” she said.

Acronymage |

DFS: Only one in five humanitarian organisations has an AI policy, but 70% of staff use AI on a daily or weekly basis, according to research by the Humanitarian Leadership Academy and Data Friendly Space. “While humanitarian workers worldwide are rapidly integrating artificial intelligence tools into their work, their organisations are struggling to keep pace with proper governance, training, and ethical frameworks,” researchers said.

ICRC: Awash in ICRC flags but not a red cross in sight? Then you might have walked in on the International Cosmic Ray Conference, which hit Geneva in July. 

IOMed: This year saw the creation of a new potentially confusing abbreviation, the International Organization for Mediation, headquartered in Hong Kong. 

OSSC: The Outer Space Security Conference just wrapped up. 

End note |

What’s the exit plan for deprioritised crises? This month, colleague Will Worley continued reporting on the humanitarian reset, focusing on the uncertainty and confusion some of the top-down planning has caused in places like Mozambique.

• One upside: Local groups are organising. Rumours that Mozambique was being considered for “depriortisation” or an “accelerated transition” – the precise meaning of either has been murky – caught local NGOs by surprise. But it’s pushed them to organise and advocate, leading to the creation of a local coordination platform. “Many of us were just awakened” by the reset, Nyararai Magudu, founder of the NGO Girl Child Rights, told Worley. “Traditionally, local NGOs have not been given space to shape how the humanitarian response should be. We have been passive players.”

   

• One trend: There is no exit plan. The Mozambique office of the UN’s relief coordination arm, OCHA, has no exit strategy spelling out an ethical drawdown of humanitarian operations in a country struggling with exploitation, conflict, and disasters, according to an internal audit published in July. OCHA Mozambique says it will establish a long-term exit strategy in September 2026, according to a response highlighted in the audit. There have been months of Geneva-level talk on what to prioritise and what to cut and consolidate. But how “reset”-ready are humanitarians on the ground? It’s also a reminder that donor budget cuts aren’t the only reason why the humanitarian sector is in crisis: In Mozambique and elsewhere, the international system does not prepare for the day it won’t be there. 

Have any tips, recommendations, or indecipherable acronyms to share with the Inklings newsletter? Get in touch: [email protected]