The U.S. Should Permanently Stop All Funding to UNRWA

Since 1950, the United States has donated almost $7.5 billion to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA). However, more than 77 years after its creation, ostensibly, not even one “Palestine refugee” has been permanently resettled under the agency’s watch. On the contrary, UNRWA’s registry has swollen from about 711,000 people in 1950 to nearly six million today. This eight‑fold increase underscores how tens of billions of dollars in funding to UNRWA from the international community have sustained, rather than diminished, the protracted situation that should have ended decades ago.

* Legend: See notes^{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7}

UNRWA was never meant to be permanent. When the UN General Assembly created the agency under Resolution 302 (IV) in December 1949,⁸ the “Palestine refugees” were only a small fraction of the tens of millions worldwide still receiving UN aid after World War II, including millions of Jews who survived the Holocaust. The agency was supposed to close within two years, or unless the Assembly decided otherwise, expecting that the refugees – displaced after Israel’s 1948 War of Independence started by the neighboring Arab countries – would meanwhile be resettled through other channels.

Instead, UNRWA remains in business today, continues to squander billions of dollars – including $1,399,670,708 in just 2024⁹ – and has achieved virtually none of its original goals, while its registry continues to grow. In addition, the agency has become infiltrated by terrorist groups and has been found actively fueling the radicalization of the Palestinian refugees. The failure of the agency was stressed beyond any imagination when a number of its members even participated in the October 7, 2023, massacre.

If U.S. Funding is Not Going Toward Resettlement, Then What is it Being Used For?

Unlike the UN’s broader global agency for refugees, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), UNRWA does not have a mandate to resettle refugees. The Arab League endorsed the agency only on the condition that resettlement remain off‑limits. From their point of view, the Palestinian refugees were nothing more than political pawns and leverage to continue their fight against Israel. To support that idea, they developed the unprecedented doctrine known as the “right of return,” according to which every Palestinian refugee and their off-spring would eternally enjoy the “right” to flood Israel. After the doctrine became entrenched, Palestinian Authority (PA) Chairman Mahmoud Abbas called it “a red line for the Palestinian leadership which cannot be compromised on or neglected, regardless of how great the sacrifices may be.”¹⁰ Abbas even preferred allowing Palestinian refugees in Syria to face their fate and potentially be killed rather that agreeing to waive their “right” to destroy Israel.¹¹

Instead, UNRWA’s mandate is confined to providing what it refers to as “humanitarian relief” and public works programs, framing the refugee issue as an economic assistance problem rather than a failure of resettlement. UNRWA, which is supposed to provide assistance and protection to refugees living in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, puts its money, according to its annual operational reports, toward education and teacher pay, health clinics and mobile medical teams, legal aid and welfare stipends, job training and cash‑loan programs, shelter repairs and camp utilities, road and building upgrades, and – during “crises” – emergency food, cash, blankets, tents, mobile clinics, vaccines, fuel, and trucked‑in water.

UNRWA also continuously registers the descendants of original refugees – including children and grandchildren now living far beyond the camps – using member-only mobile platforms like eUNRWA, launched in 2023, to “enhance registration services for Palestine refugees and other eligible persons within its fields of operation and beyond.” According to its 2024 Operational Report, by the end of 2024, over 96% of registration transactions were conducted through UNRWA.¹²

However, according to UNRWA’s project database,¹³ several recent grants did not go toward Palestine refugees at all:

• $17,877,760 – reconstruction and repair of affected houses for “non-refugees and six sports clubs” (completed May 2025).¹⁴

• $7,082,625 – reconstruction and repair of about 250 affected houses for “non-Palestinian refugees in the Gaza strip” (completed May 31, 2025)¹⁵

• $10,000,000 – reconstruction of affected houses for “non-Palestinian refugees,” in the Gaza Strip (completed in 2021).¹⁶

• $9,996,776 – “reconstruction and rehabilitation works for more than 150 damaged houses belonging to the non-refugee population” (completed in 2021).¹⁷

U.S. Funding to UNRWA

U.S. funding for UNRWA started upon creation of the agency. For the first 50 years,¹⁸ funding averaged about $45 million annually. In the early 2000s, the U.S. contributions gradually grew to $186 million in 2008. Under the Obama administration, U.S. donations to UNRWA rose substantially, reaching $390 million in 2014 alone, before dropping to $360 million annually for 2016 and 2017.¹⁹

Trump Freeze on UNRWA funding (2018):

On August 31, 2018, the Trump administration cut off all U.S. contributions to UNRWA for the first time, citing the agency’s chronic budget shortfalls and its inability to secure adequate burden‑sharing from other donors. The press statement labeled UNRWA’s ever‑expanding refugee roster “unsustainable” and said the United States “will no longer commit further funding to this irredeemably flawed operation.”²⁰

Biden Restarts Aid (FY 2021–FY 2022)

The U.S. funding freeze to UNRWA was lifted in 2021 by the Biden administration. Still, in the FY 2021 and FY 2022 appropriations acts,²¹ U.S. funding to UNRWA was conditioned on seven provisions, each intended to maintain UNRWA’s neutrality and avoid the flow of U.S. funds, through the agency, to terrorists. The provision²² required the Secretary of State to confirm in writing that UNWRA was:

“(1) utilizing Operations Support Officers in the West Bank, Gaza, and other fields of operation to inspect UNRWA installations and reporting any inappropriate use;

(2) acting promptly to address any staff or beneficiary violation of its own policies (including the policies on neutrality and impartiality of employees) and the legal requirements under section 301(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961;

(3) implementing procedures to maintain the neutrality of its facilities, including implementing a no-weapons policy, and conducting regular inspections of its installations, to ensure they are only used for humanitarian or other appropriate purposes;

(4) taking necessary and appropriate measures to ensure it is operating in compliance with the conditions of section 301(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and continuing regular reporting to the Department of State on actions it has taken to ensure conformance with such conditions;

(5) taking steps to ensure the content of all educational materials currently taught in UNRWA-administered schools and summer camps is consistent with the values of human rights, dignity, and tolerance and does not induce incitement;

(6) not engaging in operations with financial institutions or related entities in violation of relevant United States law, and is taking steps to improve the financial transparency of the organization; and

(7) in compliance with the United Nations Board of Auditors’ biennial audit requirements and is implementing in a timely fashion the Board’s recommendations.”

Critically, §301(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 requires UNRWA to “take all possible measures to assure that no part of the United States contribution shall be used to furnish assistance to any refugee who is receiving military training as a member of the so‑called Palestine Liberation Army (PLA) or any other guerrilla‑type organization or who has engaged in any act of terrorism.”²³

While it has been clear for years that UNRWA was indeed providing assistance to terrorists in breach of the provision, it would seem that the agency consistently acted to mislead the Secretary of State.²⁴

Pause After Oct. 7, 2023 (2024)

On January 26, 2024, after U.S. officials confirmed that a dozen UNRWA staffers had taken part in the October 7 massacre, the Biden administration paused every remaining U.S. disbursement to the agency²⁵ – about $300,000 in unobligated FY 2024 funds and just over $2.5 million in obligated but unpaid FY 2023 balances²⁶ – “to prohibit aid that will benefit Hamas.”²⁷

A few weeks later, Congress wrote the pause into law. Section 301 of the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 (P.L. 118‑47) blocks any State Department payment to UNRWA made from prior‑year funds, FY 2024 funds, or FY 2025 funds before March 25, 2025. (The same one‑year bar was repeated in the March 2024 Israel security supplemental.)²⁸

The FY 2021 and FY 2022 spending laws had allowed U.S. contributions to UNRWA to flow only after the Secretary of State certified UNRWA’s compliance with the above conditions. However, while those conditions appeared in §7048(d) of the 2023 omnibus, they do not appear anywhere in the FY 2024 Appropriations Act. Thus, ostensibly, the only condition to continued U.S. funding for UNRWA is §301(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, which merely bars aid to “any refugee who is receiving military training as a member of the so-called PLA or any other guerrilla type organization or who has engaged in any act of terrorism.” Every other requirement once demanded of the Secretary of State has apparently been dropped.

Before that ban could expire, President Trump signed Executive Order 14199²⁹ on February 4, 2025, “Withdrawing the United States From and Ending Funding to Certain United Nations Organizations,” directing all agencies to withhold U.S. funding to UNRWA and to review support for other UN bodies. However, while the order extended the freeze beyond the March 25, 2024, deadline, it does not restore the provision that once conditioned aid to UNRWA. Therefore, while President Trump’s order was clearly necessary, especially considering the knowledge of UNRWA’s direct involvement in the October 7, 2023, massacre, it is only an executive order and can be lifted by any future administration.

Democrats Attempt to Resume Funding to UNRWA (March 2025)

In March, the UNRWA Funding Emergency Restoration Act of 2025 was introduced to Congress in an effort to release the frozen funds and allow forthcoming FY 2025 and supplemental bills to include UNRWA funding. The Senate version (S. 898, Sen. Welch) has been in the Foreign Relations Committee since March 6, 2025, and the House companion (H.R. 2411, Rep. Carson) has sat in the Foreign Affairs Committee since March 27, 2025. Neither bill has moved further. If enacted, it would:

• Revoke Executive Order 14199.

• Eliminate any remaining statutory blocks.

• Direct the State Department to release the withheld funds “as soon as practicable.”³⁰

Unlike earlier appropriations conditions, the bill imposes just one provision: the Secretary of State must file quarterly reports on UNRWA’s adherence to recommendations issued by an “independent review group” led by former French Foreign Minister Catherine Colonna.³¹

In written testimony to the House Foreign Affairs Committee (May 17, 2024), United Nations Watch Executive Director Hillel Neuer contended that the Colonna review was, in fact, neither independent nor investigative. Its mandate, he wrote, aimed to “reassure donors,” not to examine wrongdoing, and it disregarded extensive evidence of UNRWA staff support for terrorism. Neuer further noted that UNRWA investigates only when outsiders file complaints, conducts no proactive vetting, and has never carried out a comprehensive neutrality audit. In actuality, the Colonna report focused solely on the subject of UNRWA’s “Neutrality” requirement and did nothing to truly address its infiltration by terrorists and the flow of funds through the agency to terrorists.

Therefore, if the Trump freeze is lifted and the Colonna report remains the sole check – without the provision that existed through FY 2023 – U.S. funds would flow to UNRWA with virtually no oversight, let alone effective oversight that would ensure that UNRWA was not employing terrorists and providing funds to terrorists.

UNRWA Participates in and Funds Terror

Still, even while the original provision was in place, UNRWA repeatedly failed to comply with the standard set by the Consolidated Appropriations Act. In violation of the 5th condition set out in the 2021 and 2022 Appropriations Acts, UNRWA uses PA-commissioned schoolbooks, which, according to an EU report, are replete with antisemitic content, glorify Palestinian violence and terror against Israelis, and present maps of Israel labeled “Palestine” as a way of denying Israel’s existence.³²

UNRWA staff has also been found directly participating in, aiding, and abetting terrorist organizations. An April 23, 2025, report by the Israeli government found that out of the 12,521 UNRWA employees active in Gaza during 2023-2024, 1,462 (about 12%), were identified as members of Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), or related terrorist factions. Of those 1,462 individuals, 1,157 (79%) were teachers or other education staff, 79 (5%) worked in medical services, 63 held engineering or construction posts, and the remainder served as administrators, social workers, security officers, or in other roles. In addition, the report found that of the 546 principals and deputy-principals in UNRWA’s education facilities, at least 80 (15%) are members of terrorist organizations.³³

The report also presented strong evidence that at least 18 UNRWA members participated in the of October 7, 2023, massacre. Those identified included a schoolteacher, a math teacher, a social worker, an Arabic teacher, and a school principal. The first name listed in the report, Mousa Subhi Mousa El Qidra, was both an UNRWA school counselor and a Hamas military operative who was a platoon commander in the Khan Yunis Brigade. Among other pieces of evidence provided to the UN’s Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS), El Qidra’s ID card was physically found in Mohammad Sinwar’s assistant’s office.

The report also found, based on substantial evidence, proof of UNRWA facilities in the Gaza Strip being used by Hamas as field headquarters, as deployment points, and weapons strongholds in order to deter IDF forces from targeting those locations.

All of these terrorists, and others, had received UNRWA funds, in fundamental breach not only of the wider provisions, but more specifically, of §301(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961.

Given these findings, it is thus reasonable to draw a number of conclusions:

1. Billions of dollars in U.S. aid provided to UNRWA over the nearly eight decades of its existence have, either directly or indirectly, contributed to and supported terror.

2. Over the years, UNRWA has intentionally misled³⁴ U.S. administrations and falsely denied the flow of U.S. aid into the hands of terrorists.

Comparing UNRWA to UNHCR

UNHCR, the UN’s global refugee agency, by contrast, has managed to resettle 2.176 million refugees under UNHCR programs between 2003 (the first year with harmonized global figures) and the end of 2024.³⁵ Unlike UNRWA, UNHCR does not indefinitely register descendants of refugees; once refugees are repatriated, resettled or naturalized they leave the agency’s rolls.

In addition, in 2024, UNHCR had about 19,800 staff for 36.8 million refugees – one staff member for roughly 1,900 refugees.³⁶ UNRWA, by contrast, employs about 33,000 personnel, most of them Palestinians – roughly one staff member for every 180 refugees.³⁷ Still, despite UNRWA’s staffing ratio being about ten times heavier than UNHCR’s, their resettlement total remains at zero.

UNRWA’s True Nature

Understanding UNRWA’s true nature is critical to any funding discussion. While UNRWA professes to be a humanitarian organization, its true goal is to perpetuate the notion that the “Palestine refugees” will, one day, demographically flood and democratically destroy Israel. That is why the agency does nothing to resettle the “refugees.” That is why the number of UNRWA-registered “refugees” continues to exponentially grow. That is why UNRWA refuses to remove from its registry millions of people who hold foreign citizenship and residency, and who, by any other “refugee” concept, would no longer be considered “refugees.” That is why UNRWA can maintain the “refugee” hoax – by inflating numbers.

While UNRWA temporarily acquiesced to the demand that it provide demographic and geographic transparency by launching its “Population dashboard,” access to the database was suspiciously blocked just days after the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs (JCFA) published a report on the patently false UNRWA “refugee” statistics for Lebanon.³⁸

Closer examination of UNRWA’s funding³⁹ also exposes a stark reality: UNRWA is predominantly funded (90%) by the U.S. and Europe, while the Arab countries, those responsible for the problem to start with, provide very little funding.

Policy Recommendations

Since the very existence of UNRWA is contrary to the U.S. interests and goal of finding a viable solution to the Palestinian rejection of Israel’s right to exist and only perpetuates the Palestinian conflict with Israel, the most elementary policy suggestion would be to prohibit any U.S. funding of the agency.

If, however, the administration is nonetheless determined to still provide an option for the U.S. to continue funding UNRWA’s bottomless pit of despair, legislation should be adopted that conditions any future funding to UNRWA satisfying, at the very least, and in addition to the provisions that used to appear in the legislation, all of the following requirements:

1. UNRWA must provide a full, certified, demographic, and geographical breakdown of every individual on UNRWA’s refugee registry. The breakdown should indicate who of those people on the registry were included in the original 711,000 people – i.e. all the “registered refugees” born before 1950 – and who has been added since 1950.

2. UNRWA must be required to indicate who in its registry has acquired foreign citizenship or permanent residency. Future U.S. funding would only be given to provide for the original “refugees” who have not acquired either citizenship or residency. Any “refugee” who fails to provide the relevant information must be assumed dead or to have acquired citizenship or residency.

3. UNRWA must be required to submit a time‑bound, actionable plan, that would extend for no more than three years, for the permanent resettlement of all the remaining registered refugees.

4. UNRWA must be required to present a detailed report on any staff participation in the October 7, 2023, massacre and regarding any other employee, or relative of an employee, affiliated with designated Palestinian terrorist organizations. The report should include reference to the evidence provided by Israel.

5. UNRWA must be required to cease the use of all textbooks and teaching materials produced by the PA that fail to satisfy neutrality and non‑incitement standards.

6. UNRWA must be required to limit field positions to internationally‑recruited personnel from outside UNRWA’s areas of operation, ensuring no local hires with potential ties to terrorism.

* * *

Notes