Overview
On December 8, 2025, Israeli police raided the sealed East Jerusalem headquarters of the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood, cut communications, seized equipment, and replaced the UN flag with an Israeli flag. Israel says police were accompanying municipal officials in a real‑estate debt collection action; UNRWA insists it owes no such debts and calls the incursion a breach of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, which protects UN premises from interference. The compound had already been vacated earlier in 2025 after Israeli legislation banning UNRWA’s operations on Israeli territory, including annexed East Jerusalem, took effect.
The raid is the sharpest escalation yet in a multi‑year Israeli campaign to delegitimize, defund, and ultimately dismantle UNRWA, an agency that provides schooling, healthcare, and basic services to roughly 5.9 million registered Palestinian refugees and underpins the humanitarian response in Gaza and the West Bank. After October 7, 2023, Israel’s allegations that some UNRWA staff participated in Hamas’s attack triggered donor funding freezes, a hostile Knesset law to ban the agency, and mounting physical harassment of its East Jerusalem headquarters, including arson attacks in May 2024. In late 2025 the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an advisory opinion finding Israel’s claims of systemic Hamas infiltration at UNRWA unsubstantiated and affirming Israel’s obligation to facilitate UN relief operations, but Israel rejected the ruling. The December 8 raid therefore sits at the intersection of a battle over humanitarian access in Gaza, the political future of Palestinian refugees, and the durability of UN privileges and immunities in contested Jerusalem.
Key Indicators
People Involved
Organizations Involved
UNRWA is the UN agency mandated by the General Assembly to provide education, healthcare, relief and social services to registered Palestine refugees in Gaza, the West Bank (including East Jerusalem), Jordan, Lebanon and Syria.
The right‑wing coalition government led by Benjamin Netanyahu since late 2022 has pursued maximalist security policies, expanded settlements, and adopted an openly hostile stance toward UNRWA, framing the agency as a security threat.
The UN’s political organs, legal bodies and specialized agencies are collectively engaged in sustaining UNRWA and asserting the inviolability of UN premises in occupied East Jerusalem in the face of Israeli legislation and police actions.
Israel’s unicameral parliament has been the primary institutional driver of the legal architecture to remove UNRWA from Israel and to limit international legal oversight.
Timeline
-
UN Secretary‑General Condemns Raid as Breach of UN Immunity
UN / Public StatementAntónio Guterres issues a statement condemning the Israeli raid, emphasizing that the UNRWA compound is UN property and therefore inviolable under international law. He calls on Israel to cease further actions involving UNRWA premises and to uphold its treaty obligations.
-
Israeli Police Raid UNRWA HQ in East Jerusalem and Raise Israeli Flag
Security / Direct ActionIsraeli police, accompanied by municipal staff, force entry into UNRWA’s sealed headquarters in the Sheikh Jarrah district of East Jerusalem, cut communications, seize equipment and furniture, and replace the UN flag with Israel’s flag. Authorities describe it as a municipal debt‑collection operation; UNRWA denies owing debts and calls the move a serious violation of the inviolability of UN premises and a dangerous precedent for UN operations globally.
-
ICJ Advisory Opinion Backs UNRWA and Rejects Israeli Allegations
Legal / ICJ AdvisoryThe ICJ issues an advisory opinion finding that Israel is obliged to agree to and facilitate relief schemes provided by the UN, “in particular UNRWA,” and that Israel’s claims that UNRWA is infiltrated by Hamas or non‑neutral were not substantiated in the record before the Court. Israel’s Foreign Ministry publicly rejects the ruling as politicized.
-
Pro‑Ban Lawmakers Press for Stricter Enforcement Against UNRWA
Domestic PoliticsReports indicate that UNRWA remains active in parts of East Jerusalem and the West Bank despite the ban. Likud MK Dan Illouz, who sponsored one of the UNRWA bills, forms a Knesset Lobby for Closing UNRWA to push authorities, including the police, to apply the law fully.
-
Israel’s UNRWA Ban Takes Effect Amid Confusion on the Ground
ImplementationThe legal ban on UNRWA operations in Israel, including East Jerusalem, formally takes effect. Israel orders UNRWA to vacate its Jerusalem premises and forbids contact with its staff, but many clinics and schools continue operating due to unclear enforcement, leaving Palestinians anxious about losing vital services.
-
UNRWA Tells UN Security Council Israeli Ban Will Be ‘Disastrous’
UN / DiplomacyAhead of the ban’s entry into force, Lazzarini briefs the Security Council that full implementation would massively weaken humanitarian operations in Gaza and deepen instability. The U.S. deputy ambassador under the new Trump administration accuses UNRWA of exaggerating and expresses support for Israel’s decision to close its Jerusalem offices.
-
UNRWA Chief Warns of Existential Threat at UN General Assembly
UN / Public StatementPhilippe Lazzarini tells the UN General Assembly that the Knesset’s legislation poses an existential threat to UNRWA and is part of a broader campaign to end Palestinians’ right to self‑determination and change the parameters of any political solution.
-
Knesset Passes Laws Barring UNRWA from Israel
LegislationIsrael’s Knesset approves two laws to cease UNRWA operations and strip the agency of privileges and immunities in Israeli territory, including annexed East Jerusalem. Supporters call it an historic security move; UN bodies condemn it as contrary to the UN Charter and the Convention on Privileges and Immunities.
-
ICJ Declares Israel’s Prolonged Occupation Unlawful
Legal / ICJ AdvisoryThe International Court of Justice issues an advisory opinion finding Israel’s continued presence in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, unlawful and calling on states and international organizations not to recognize or assist the situation. This strengthens legal arguments that Israel must respect UN operations in occupied East Jerusalem.
-
Arson Attacks Force Closure of UNRWA East Jerusalem HQ
Security / HarassmentIsraeli extremists set fires twice along the perimeter of UNRWA’s East Jerusalem headquarters as crowds chant slogans including “burn down the United Nations.” No staff are killed but the compound suffers significant damage, and UNRWA closes the site until security can be restored. EU and Arab states condemn the attacks and urge Israel, as occupying power, to protect UN premises.
-
Colonna Review Finds Neutrality Gaps but No Proof of Systemic Hamas Control
InvestigationAn independent review panel led by former French foreign minister Catherine Colonna reports that while UNRWA has neutrality issues to fix, Israel has not provided evidence to substantiate its claims of widespread Hamas infiltration. The findings help many donors resume funding, though U.S. support remains frozen under U.S. law until 2025.
-
Israeli Allegations Against UNRWA Staff Trigger Donor Pauses
Allegations / FundingIsrael informs the UN that around a dozen UNRWA employees were involved in the October 7 attacks. UNRWA fires those it can identify and opens investigations; the U.S. and at least 15 other donors pause funding, putting Gaza aid at risk.
-
Hamas Attack on Israel Spurs Gaza War
Security / Trigger EventHamas‑led militants launch a cross‑border assault, killing roughly 1,200 people in Israel and seizing hostages. Israel responds with a massive military campaign in Gaza, during which UNRWA becomes central to humanitarian aid while also coming under intense scrutiny for alleged staff involvement with Hamas.
-
U.S. Ends All Funding for UNRWA
Funding / Policy ShiftThe Trump administration announces it will end decades of U.S. funding for UNRWA, calling the agency flawed and cutting nearly $300 million in planned support. This move foreshadows later efforts to weaken UNRWA as a political actor in the Israel–Palestine arena.
Scenarios
Full Enforcement: Israel Systematically Evicts UNRWA from Jerusalem and Tightens Gaza Leverage
Discussed by: Israeli right‑wing lawmakers and advocacy groups; coverage in JNS, Times of Israel, and statements by National Security Minister Ben Gvir and MK Dan Illouz
In this scenario, the December 8 raid marks the beginning of a systematic campaign to evict UNRWA from all remaining facilities in East Jerusalem and to convert its large headquarters compound into housing or governmental use, as some legislators have proposed. Police and municipal authorities follow up with more seizures framed as debt collection or zoning enforcement, eventually removing all UN signage and physically rebranding the site as Israeli state property. Israel leverages the ban to restrict coordination for Gaza crossings and West Bank operations, pushing other UN agencies or NGOs to take over some roles under tighter Israeli control. Humanitarian actors warn that such fragmentation will reduce capacity and politicize aid. The ICJ opinions remain legally significant but practically unenforced, as Security Council action is blocked by U.S. vetoes and divisions among major powers.
Managed Standoff: UNRWA Relocates Politically, Operates Logistically, While Legal Dispute Remains Frozen
Discussed by: UN officials, European diplomats, and humanitarian NGOs in Geneva and New York
Here, international backlash to the raid—including statements from EU members, Arab states, and UN leadership—forces Israel to avoid further high‑visibility confrontations with UN premises, even as it keeps the ban and the December 8 seizure in place. UNRWA permanently relocates its West Bank field HQ functions to Amman, Ramallah, or elsewhere, while continuing to run schools and clinics inside East Jerusalem and the West Bank through semi‑deniable arrangements and local staff. Israel tacitly tolerates this limited presence as long as it can claim UNRWA no longer has formal headquarters status on sovereign Israeli soil. The legal clash over immunities and the ICJ’s advisory opinions persists in UN fora, but both sides settle into a de facto equilibrium characterized by rhetorical warfare, occasional harassment, and constrained but ongoing humanitarian operations.
Structural Reform: Rebranding or Restructuring UNRWA to Restore U.S. Funding and Ease Israeli Pressure
Discussed by: Some Western diplomats, think‑tank analysts, and internal UN policy discussions following the Colonna review
Under this scenario, sustained pressure from Israel and Washington, coupled with the ICJ’s legal backing for UN relief, leads to a negotiated compromise: UNRWA adopts deeper governance reforms, possibly rebrands or merges certain functions into other UN agencies, and invites expanded oversight from key donors. In exchange, Israel quietly scales back efforts to physically target UN premises and allows more predictable coordination for Gaza and West Bank operations; the U.S. might partially restore funding under new statutory conditions. Palestinian leadership and host Arab states would likely resist any changes seen as diluting refugee rights, but could accept a model that preserves educational and health services and explicitly affirms that reorganization does not affect refugee status. This path would require political will in Jerusalem and Washington that is currently uncertain.
Humanitarian Collapse and Radicalization if UNRWA Is Forced Out Without a Viable Substitute
Discussed by: UNRWA leadership, UN human rights mechanisms, and humanitarian NGOs warning of a ‘nightmare scenario’
If Israel aggressively enforces the ban and Washington maintains or deepens defunding while no alternative mechanism is built, UNRWA’s ability to deliver services in Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem could implode. Schools might close, health clinics shutter, and large parts of Gaza’s aid pipeline stall—especially as UNRWA currently handles more than half of aid deliveries. The resulting vacuum in education, basic healthcare and social services would likely fuel despair and radicalization among refugee youth, undermining any political transition in Gaza and potentially strengthening armed groups. This scenario risks destabilizing Jordan, Lebanon and Syria as well, where UNRWA runs extensive programs. It would also deepen international rifts over Israel and could spur new legal and political efforts to sanction or isolate Israel within UN bodies.
Historical Context
U.S. Defunding of UNRWA in 2018
2018What Happened
In 2018, the Trump administration abruptly ended all U.S. funding to UNRWA, cutting nearly $300 million and branding the agency “irredeemably flawed.” As the U.S. had been UNRWA’s largest single donor, the decision created a major financial crisis, forcing layoffs and appeals to other donors. Gulf states and European governments stepped in with emergency funds, allowing UNRWA to survive though at reduced capacity.
Outcome
Short term: The funding cut strained UNRWA’s operations but did not dismantle the agency; other donors partially filled the gap, and the Biden administration later restored U.S. contributions before they were paused again in 2024 over the October 7 staff allegations.
Long term: The episode set a precedent for using UNRWA’s financial vulnerability as leverage in broader political fights over Palestinian refugees and signaled to Israel that major donors might back radical changes to the agency.
Why It's Relevant
The 2018 defunding demonstrates that attempts to weaken UNRWA through external pressure can be partially offset by other states, but they also leave the agency chronically fragile and politicized. Today’s confrontation over police raids and UN immunity in Jerusalem builds on this earlier financial pressure, indicating a shift from budgetary tactics to direct legal and physical challenges.
Sudan’s Expulsion of Major Aid Agencies from Darfur (2009)
2009What Happened
Following the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrant for President Omar al‑Bashir over war crimes in Darfur, Sudan expelled at least 10–13 major international aid organizations such as Oxfam and Save the Children, accusing them of spying and collaborating with the ICC. These NGOs had been responsible for roughly half of the relief operations in Darfur, providing food, water, and health services to millions.
Outcome
Short term: The expulsions severely disrupted humanitarian operations and heightened risks for civilians in Darfur, as the UN warned it could not compensate for the loss of NGO capacity.
Long term: Sudan’s move entrenched government control over aid flows and limited independent monitoring, but did not end the conflict or accountability pressures. Over time, some humanitarian capacity was rebuilt, but access remained heavily politicized and restricted.
Why It's Relevant
Sudan’s case shows how states under international legal scrutiny may retaliate by expelling or constraining humanitarian actors, even at the cost of worsening crises. The dynamic is similar in Israel’s move against UNRWA following ICJ scrutiny: legal pressure from international courts coincides with efforts by the targeted state to reassert sovereignty by curbing external humanitarian and UN presences.
Iran Hostage Crisis and ICJ Case on U.S. Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran
1979–1981; ICJ judgment 1980What Happened
In November 1979, Iranian students seized the U.S. embassy in Tehran and held American diplomats hostage for 444 days, blatantly violating the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. The United States brought a case to the ICJ, which ruled in 1980 that Iran had violated its obligations to protect diplomatic premises and staff and was required to release the hostages and restore the embassy.
Outcome
Short term: The ICJ judgment strengthened the legal principle of inviolability of diplomatic premises, though the hostages were ultimately freed through political negotiations (the Algiers Accords) rather than court enforcement.
Long term: The case became a landmark precedent affirming that states must protect foreign missions and cannot use domestic politics to justify breaches of inviolability. It remains a touchstone in discussions of international law and host‑state responsibilities.
Why It's Relevant
While UN premises are governed by different legal instruments than embassies, the underlying principle of inviolability is analogous. The ICJ’s Tehran ruling is likely to be cited in debates over Israel’s December 8 raid on UNRWA’s East Jerusalem compound: if a state cannot lawfully tolerate or commit an attack on a foreign embassy, its scope to unilaterally enter, seize, or re‑flag UN premises is also narrowly constrained under international law. The comparison underscores the gravity of Israel’s actions for the UN system as a whole.