United States President Joe Biden’s administration is facing criticism after a US-backed report on famine in the Gaza Strip was retracted this week, drawing accusations of political interference and pro-Israel bias.

The report by the Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET), which provides information about global food insecurity, had warned that a “famine scenario” was unfolding in northern Gaza during Israel’s war on the territory.

A note on the FEWS NET website, viewed by Al Jazeera on Thursday, said the group’s “December 23 Alert is under further review and is expected to be re-released with updated data and analysis in January”.

The Associated Press news agency, quoting unnamed American officials, said the US asked for the report to be retracted. FEWS NET is funded by the US Agency for International Development (USAID).

USAID did not immediately respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment on Thursday afternoon.

Israel’s war in Gaza has killed more than 45,300 Palestinians since early October 2023 and plunged the coastal enclave into a dire humanitarian crisis as access to food, water, medicine and other supplies is severely curtailed.

An Israeli military offensive in the northern part of the territory has drawn particular concern in recent months with experts warning in November of a “strong likelihood” that famine was imminent in the area.

“Starvation, malnutrition, and excess mortality due to malnutrition and disease, are rapidly increasing” in northern Gaza, the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification said in an alert on November 8.

“Famine thresholds may have already been crossed or else will be in the near future,” it said.

The report

The FEWS NET report dated December 23 noted that Israel has maintained a “near-total blockade of humanitarian and commercial food supplies to besieged areas” of northern Gaza for nearly 80 days.

That includes the Jabalia, Beit Lahiya and Beit Hanoon areas, where rights groups have estimated thousands of Palestinians are trapped.

“Based on the collapse of the food system and worsening access to water, sanitation, and health services in these areas … it is highly likely that the food consumption and acute malnutrition thresholds for Famine (IPC Phase 5) have now been surpassed in North Gaza Governorate,” the FEWS NET report had said.

The network added that without a change to Israeli policy on food supplies entering the area, it expected that two to 15 people would die per day from January to March at least, which would surpass the “famine threshold”.

The report had spurred public criticism from the US ambassador to Israel, Jack Lew, who in a statement on Tuesday said FEWS NET had relied on “outdated and inaccurate” data.

Lew disputed the number of civilians believed to be living in northern Gaza, saying the civilian population was “in the range of 7,000-15,000, not 65,000-75,000 which is the basis of this report”.

“At a time when inaccurate information is causing confusion and accusations, it is irresponsible to issue a report like this,” he said.

pic.twitter.com/f9rxgHdVPm

— Ambassador Jack Lew (@USAmbIsrael) December 24, 2024

‘Bullying’

But Palestinian rights advocates condemned the ambassador’s remarks. Some accused Lew of appearing to welcome the forced displacement of Palestinians in Gaza.

“To reject a report on starvation in northern Gaza by appearing to boast about the fact that it has been successfully ethnically cleansed of its native population is just the latest example of Biden administration officials supporting, enabling and excusing Israel’s clear and open campaign of genocide in Gaza,” the Council on American-Islamic Relations said in a statement.

The group urged FEWS NET “not to submit to the bullying of genocide supporters”.

Huwaida Arraf, a prominent Palestinian American human rights lawyer, also criticised Lew for “relying on Israeli sources instead of your own experts”.

“Do you work for Israel or the American people, the overwhelming majority of whom disapprove of US support for this genocide?” she wrote on X.

Polls over the past year have shown a high percentage of Americans are opposed to Israel’s offensive in Gaza and want an end to the war.

A March survey by Gallup found that 55 percent of people in the US disapproved of Israel’s actions in Gaza while a more recent poll by the Pew Research Center, released in October, suggested about three in 10 Americans believed Israel’s military offensive is “going too far”.

While the Biden administration has said it is pushing for a ceasefire in Gaza, it has rebuffed calls to condition US assistance to Israel as a way to bring the war to an end.

Washington gives its ally at least $3.8bn in military assistance annually, and researchers at Brown University recently estimated that the Biden administration provided an additional $17.9bn to Israel since the start of the Gaza war.

The US is required under its own laws to suspend military assistance to a country if that country restricts the delivery of American-backed humanitarian aid, but Biden’s administration has so far refused to apply that rule to Israel.

“We, at this time, have not made an assessment that the Israelis are in violation of US law,” Department of State spokesperson Vedant Patel told reporters in November despite the reports of “imminent” famine in northern Gaza.

An investigation by The New York Times has found that Israel, in the weeks after Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack, severely undermined its system of safeguards to make it easier to strike Gaza, and used flawed methods to find targets and assess the risk to civilians.

The Israeli military acknowledged changes to its rules of engagement but said they were made in the context of an unprecedented military threat and always complied with the laws of war.

Here are some of the main takeaways from the investigation.

Raised threshold of civilian harm per pre-emptive strike

In previous conflicts with Hamas, Israeli officers were usually only allowed to endanger fewer than 10 civilians in a given strike. In many cases the limit was five, or even zero.

At the start of this war, the Israeli military increased that threshold to 20, before reducing it in certain contexts a month later. Strikes that could harm more than 100 civilians would also be permitted on a case-by-case basis.

Expanded list of targets

Israel vastly increased the number of military targets that it proactively sought to strike. Officers could now pursue not only the smaller pool of senior Hamas commanders, arms depots and rocket launchers that were the focus of earlier campaigns, but also thousands of low-ranking fighters as well as those indirectly involved in military matters.

Removed limits on how many civilians could be put at risk each day

The military leadership briefly ordered that its forces could cumulatively risk killing up to 500 civilians a day in preplanned strikes. Two days later, even this limit was lifted, allowing officers to conduct as many strikes as they deemed lawful.

Struck too fast to vet all targets properly

The pace of the bombing campaign was one of the most intense in 21st-century warfare, which officers said made it far harder to vet targets properly. Israel dropped or fired nearly 30,000 munitions into Gaza in the first seven weeks, at least 30 times more than the U.S.-led coalition fired in the first seven weeks of its bombing campaign against ISIS.

Used a simplistic risk assessment

Israel often used a simplistic statistical model to assess the risk of civilian harm: It regularly estimated the number of civilians in a building where a target was believed to be hiding by using a formula based largely on the level of cellphone usage in the surrounding neighborhood.

Dropped large, inaccurate bombs

In previous wars, the air force would often use a “roof knock,” a smaller munition to give civilians some time to flee an imminent attack. From the first day of this war, Israel significantly reduced its use of roof knocks. The military also sometimes used less-accurate “dumb bombs,” as well as 2,000-pound bombs.

Used AI to propose targets

Israel used an artificial intelligence system in a widespread way for the first time. It helped officers analyze and sign off on targets exponentially more quickly, increasing the number of targets that officers could propose each day.

Delayed strikes

Hours often passed between when an officer vetted a target and when the air force launched a strike at him. This meant strikes often relied on outdated intelligence.

JOHANNESBURG – Key Republicans are already pressing the incoming Trump administration to kick South Africa out of lucrative trade arrangements, should the South African government not change its position on Russia, China, Iran and Israel.

Most at risk is South Africa’s duty-free exports to the U.S. of items such as cars and citrus fruit under AGOA – the African Growth and Opportunity Act, and with it the potential loss of tens of thousands of African jobs. South Africa is likely to be under intense scrutiny from the incoming administration. 

A publication from the Center for African Studies at Howard University, in 2023, warned that a country wanting AGOA’s preferential trade agreements “cannot act in a manner that undermines U.S. national security or foreign policy interests”.

South Africa joins Russia’s military aircraft and naval vessels on exercises, allowing Pretoria’s naval bases to be used by the Kremlin and Russia’s sanctioned warships. Senior South African military officials have received training in Moscow. At the U.N., South Africa has refused to condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. 

BIDEN TRAVELS TO AFRICA WHERE POLICIES WERE ‘OVER-PROMISED AND UNDER-DELIVERED,’ AMID MASSIVE CHINA EXPANSION

South Africa’s majority ANC party has met with terror group Hamas, and recently one branch of the ANC supported a local Muslim leader who reportedly shouted to a cheering crowd, “I am Hamas, Cape Town is Hamas, Viva Hamas!” The government also issued a statement condemning the killing this year of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh. The country’s foreign minister, Ronald Lamola, spoke out against the “assassination” of this designated terrorist leader, saying “such acts of extrajudicial killings violate international law.”

South Africa has accused Israel of genocide at the International Court of Justice.

South Africa’s biggest trading partner is China, with the two countries being founder members of the BRICS trade organization. South Africa has welcomed the inclusion now of Iran in BRICS. There have been accusations of deep links between Tehran and Pretoria.

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin during the BRICS summit in Kazan on Oct. 23, 2024. (Alexander Zemlianichenko/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)

“Given the South African positions on the Russia-Ukraine and Mideast conflicts, South Africa is leaning away from American positions in a number of ways, most especially in its vigorous pursuit of Israel and its leaders in the international courts,” J. Brooks Spector told Fox News Digital. 

Spector, a former U.S. diplomat now based in Johannesburg, and deputy editor of the respected Daily Maverick, added that “continuing action and rhetoric by South Africa in its pursuit of Israel in international court efforts will, however, encourage Republicans in Congress (and probably in the administration as well) to strip South Africa of benefits under the African Growth and Opportunity Act, assuming the act is renewed next year.”

BIDEN-HARRIS ADMIN ACCUSED OF ‘TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE’ TO SAVE THE PEOPLE OF WAR-TORN, FAMINE-STRICKEN SUDAN

“Such pursuits by the South African government may also lead to efforts to cut back on assistance to important efforts such as PEPFAR – the aid program that, together with the Global Fund and local organizations, has been crucial in the country’s successful efforts combatting HIV and AIDS.”

One such leading Republican, Sen. Jim Risch of Idaho, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, told Fox News Digital, “I remain concerned about South Africa’s efforts to cozy up to Russia, China and Iran, including Iran’s terror proxies, and the impact this has on U.S. national security – a vital element in AGOA eligibility. The country’s foreign policy actions will remain a focus of my oversight efforts.” 

Naledi Pandor, minister of international relations and cooperation of South Africa, and Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, minister of foreign affairs of Iran, meet in Tehran on Oct. 22, 2023. (Haydar Sahin/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Africa and member of the Senate Finance Committee, slammed South Africa in 2023, “South Africa has harbored sanctioned Russian ships, expanded relations with Iran and issued statements against Israel’s right to defend itself following Hamas’ recent terror attacks” 

Both of these influential Republican leaders are expected to become more powerful when President-elect Trump takes office in January, with Scott’s office staff telling Fox News Digital, “Sen. Scott looks forward to working with the Trump administration to ensure that AGOA participants are not undermining our national security interests.”

The now deceased Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal at a rally in his honor on Oct. 21, 2015, in Cape Town. South Africa. (Rodger Bosch/AFP via Getty Images)

South Africa’s moves are very definitely in an extremely bright spotlight in Washington. From inside the beltway, Richard Goldberg told Fox News Digital he’s worried particularly over potential links between South Africa and Iran. Goldberg is a former member of the National Security Council, and a senior adviser at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. He told Fox, “The first step is to build the case publicly, and give South Africa one last moment of choosing. We should declassify intelligence about South Africa’s deep relationship with Iran, and any other support or partnership with terrorist groups.”

Goldberg continued, “And then we need to use our full diplomatic and economic weight to force Pretoria to choose between the United States and our terrorist adversaries. AGOA should be one of several items on the policy menu.”

South Africa’s Department of International Relations didn’t respond to several requests for comment. But COSATU’s Parliamentary Co-ordinator, Matthew Parks did. COSATU is the Confederation of South African Trade Unions, historically aligned with President Cyril Ramaphosa’s ANC party. Parks is highly respected for his meaningful and dignified pursuance of workers’ rights. His members have much to lose, including potentially their jobs, if South Africa is pushed out of AGOA. But he appeared to be cautiously optimistic when talking to Fox News Digital, “We are confident that our relations with the U.S. will continue to grow, including through AGOA, simply because it is to the benefit of both our peoples.”

Sen. Tim Scott and former President Trump during a Fox News Channel town hall on Feb. 20, 2024, in Greenville, South Carolina. (AP Photo/Chris Carlson)

“We’ve been extensively involved in engagements between South Africa and the U.S., on how to deepen our relations and toward the renewal of AGOA,” Parks continued.  “We’ve engaged extensively with our colleagues in the U.S. labor movement, business community, Congress (both Republicans and Democrats), the State Department, Department of Labor, NSC and the White House.”

As Trump moves into the White House, nearby Ebrahim Rassool will be starting his second term as South African ambassador to the U.S. This month he talked to the Daily Maverick on South Africa’s challenges with the new administration, referring to South Africa’s attack on Israel at the ICJ. “We will stick by the case, but let us now trust our legal team,” he said, “trust the evidence that we have placed in front of the judges of the ICJ, trust the judges of the ICJ to come to a sustainable, just solution – but that we need to put away the megaphone now.” 

THOUSANDS OF CHRISTIANS ‘DELIBERATELY TARGETED’ AND KILLED IN NIGERIA, NEW REPORT SAYS

Sen. Jim Risch during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing at the U.S. Capitol on April 26, 2022. (Bonnie Cash-Pool/Getty Images)

Rassool pointed out that the South African oranges exported to the U.S. under AGOA enabled Americans to drink orange juice all year round, when Florida and California oranges were out of season. 

And Rassool added, “Why would you want to punish America with expensive cars when the BMWs coming from South Africa are going to be much cheaper than getting them from Germany or manufacturing your own?

“Likewise, to point out that American cancer patients are receiving medical nuclear isotopes that come from South Africa.”

The expulsion of South Africa from AGOA would be “disastrous,” Renai Moothilal wrote in the Business Day newspaper last year. Moothilal is CEO of the National Association of Automotive Component & Allied Manufacturers, and wrote, “It will be no surprise if some component manufacturers close their doors. U.S.-headquartered multinational manufacturers with plants here may exit the South African country if there are volume losses linked to our exclusion from AGOA, or other forms of political pressure are brought to bear.”

Observers note there are loud threats coming from President-elect Trump himself, including a claim that he will slap a 100% import tariff on countries like South Africa if, as members of BRICS, they adopt a new currency to rival the dollar. In the other corner of the ring, South African politicians are taking a more placatory and reserved tone. The Democratic Alliance or DA is South Africa’s main opposition party. But since May, they have also been members of the government of national unity, working in a sometimes noisy coalition with President Ramaphosa’s ANC. 

The Russian frigate Admiral Gorshkov docked in the Cape Town harbor, Feb. ​14​, 2023, en route to naval exercises with the South African and Chinese Navy. (AP Photo/Nardus Engelbrecht)

Emma Powell, the DA’s national spokesperson for foreign affairs, told Fox News Digital that it’s likely the relationship between Pretoria and Washington “will become increasingly transactional, with greater emphasis placed on equitable reciprocity. This would contrast the Biden administration’s approach to beneficiation-based investment and development. There is also likely to be less tolerance for any action on the part of the South African government that may be perceived as undermining the national security interests of the United States.”

Powell added “the Trump administration is also likely to take a more cautious approach on AGOA eligibility.”

J. Brooks Spector told Fox News Digital he could take home one strong positive: “The incoming U.S. president’s often-expressed support for transactional foreign economic policies may possibly be an incentive for Africa’s nations – urged on by South Africa – to come together with initiatives offering trade and market concessions in Africa to America.”