Gaza humanitarian aid and the politics of narrative management
3 Min Read
Declassified UK states that the domination of Gaza humanitarian aid drops in international headlines risks repeating the failures of Nigeria’s Biafra war.
-
A military transport aircraft drops humanitarian aid over Al-Zawayda, in the central Gaza Strip, on July 28, 2025. (Eyad Baba / AFP)
Some 21 months into "Israel’s" ongoing aggression, the suffering in Gaza is finally being acknowledged by Britain’s political and media establishment. Yet this recognition remains hollow, according to Declassified UK's Anthony Hayward.
Hayward writes that framing the situation as a matter of Gaza humanitarian aid alone distracts from accountability and obscures those complicit in what many describe as genocide.
Images of starving children dominate headlines, stirring pity but not justice. The crisis becomes a spectacle of suffering, rather than a call to challenge the structures that perpetuate it.
Focusing solely on humanitarian crisis narratives erases responsibility, the article states. Much like in past conflicts, presenting images of famine or displacement without naming perpetrators allows governments and corporations to appear concerned while sustaining policies that fuel violence.
Read more: Gaza health system on the brink: Critical shortages, rising death toll
Lessons from Nigeria’s Biafra War
Hayward compares the parallels between Gaza and Nigeria’s Biafra war (1967–1970). Backed and armed by Britain, Nigerian federal forces imposed a blockade that led to mass starvation, killing up to three million people. British media later saturated the public with images of starving children while the government justified arms sales as “moral leverage.”
In both Nigeria then and Gaza today, humanitarian appeals were used to deflect attention from deeper political accountability, with aid becoming the focus rather than justice.
British media coverage of Biafra was heavily managed by the government to protect oil interests. Similarly, in Gaza today, Hayward notes that outlets highlight children’s suffering while downplaying the role of the blockade, arms sales, and military support to "Israel."
This narrative framing absolves Britain of complicity while presenting it as a humanitarian partner.
Depoliticising suffering in Gaza through aid narratives
By presenting Gaza humanitarian aid as the primary solution, the Declassified UK writer states that the political establishment obscures the causes of suffering: siege, bombardment, and the systematic targeting of civilian infrastructure. Just as in Biafra, humanitarian appeals risk becoming a way to soothe public conscience without addressing the structures of violence.
Recent revelations underscore the intertwining of government and corporate power. Britain continues to supply parts for Israeli F-35 jets and involves arms manufacturers like BAE Systems in diplomatic roles. Companies tied to energy and defense profits remain embedded in policymaking, ensuring that Gaza aid is framed as compassion while violence continues.
The author states that this mirrors Biafra, where British oil interests shaped foreign policy under the guise of protecting African unity.
Read more: Institutionalized starvation as 'Israel' enables aid violence: MSF
Why Gaza aid without accountability falls short
Hayward writes that starvation in Gaza is not accidental; it is a weapon of war. Treating it purely as a humanitarian emergency ignores the political structures and actors sustaining it. True compassion requires accountability: naming those complicit, exposing the corporate and governmental ties to "Israel’s" war, and demanding an end to impunity.
