IDF to Oversee Distribution to Mitigate ICC Concerns. Is Bibi’s trip to Washington a factor? The withholding of aid has added pressure on Hamas but not nearly enough to budge their stance on hostage negotiations. Defense Minister Katz furious about leak, insisting to stress that Hamas will not be distributing it.

The IDF is preparing to resume the transfer of food, medicine, and fuel into Gaza—despite no breakthrough in hostage negotiations and ample supplies reportedly still stockpiled for at least another month. According to Yediot Aharonot, the military presented what it calls a “humanitarian dimmer,” a metric assessing when Gaza’s essential resources would run out. The current estimate: more than four weeks remain.

The plan includes a new pilot program, likely centered near Rafah, in which IDF soldiers—rather than UNRWA or Hamas-linked personnel—will oversee the direct distribution of aid to civilians, in tandem with vetted international aid organizations. This effort is less about alleviating suffering than about preempting war-crimes allegations, particularly amid growing fears of ICC indictments.

The rationale? Legal exposure. By retaking control of aid operations, Israel is seeking to demonstrate compliance with international humanitarian law—before it faces potential prosecution. As Yediot reported, the move was initiated over concerns that top IDF commanders and government officials could be personally targeted under claims that withholding aid constitutes a war crime.

This development comes as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly altered the flight path for his recent visit to the United States to avoid airspace over countries that may cooperate with the International Criminal Court. Though Israel does not recognize ICC jurisdiction, the threat of enforcement by third-party states is real—especially in Europe or parts of Latin America and Africa that are signatories to the Rome Statute.

Adding to the pressure is the recent public disclosure that over 20,000 aid trucks entered Gaza during the 43-day ceasefire—three times the number entering during wartime. Yet, less than half of this aid reached civilians. According to Israeli officials, Hamas routinely hijacks shipments, either stockpiling or reselling goods at extortionate prices.

Ironically, aid restrictions had been working to Israel’s advantage, stirring civilian resentment against Hamas. And the Israeli Supreme Court just last month rejected a petition from human rights groups demanding unfettered aid. Chief Justice Yitzhak Amit underscored that Israel does not provide humanitarian goods directly, but rather permits their passage subject to policy decisions by the elected government.

Still, the specter of individual criminal liability—not merely state-level condemnation—has shifted the calculus. Israel now appears intent on making its humanitarian case before the global court of opinion before appearing in the actual courtroom in The Hague.

Deadly March Incident Adds Urgency

Amplifying Israel’s cautious approach is a recent tragic incident in early March, when two Red Cross humanitarian workers were killed during an IDF strike on Hamas terrorists exploiting ambulances as cover. According to the IDF investigation released afterward, Hamas militants had intentionally commandeered clearly marked medical vehicles to transport fighters and weapons, effectively turning humanitarian workers into human shields. Despite Israel’s repeated warnings to international organizations regarding Hamas’ cynical use of ambulances, the tragic loss of civilian aid workers drew immediate international outrage.

The incident underscored a persistent dilemma for Israel: how to ensure humanitarian support without unintentionally aiding Hamas’ operations or becoming liable for civilian casualties. The deaths of the Red Cross workers increased scrutiny from international bodies, further complicating Israel’s ongoing military operations and heightening pressure to demonstrate adherence to international humanitarian standards. Consequently, Israel’s decision to restart aid with IDF-managed distribution appears partially designed to reinforce distinctions between legitimate humanitarian efforts and Hamas’ exploitative tactics. The IDF’s direct supervision of aid could thus serve to reduce the risks of future incidents and bolster Israel’s defense against potential legal actions.

Whether this shift signals a broader diplomatic repositioning, possibly linked to Netanyahu’s meetings with U.S. conservatives and Trump allies, remains unclear. What is clear: in a war of narratives as much as of rockets, controlling the image of Israel’s conduct—both morally and legally—has become a strategic imperative.