The New York Times published an article by its columnist, Nicholas Kristof, entitled “Biden’s port in Gaza is not enough,” in which he said that President Joe Biden’s plans and his order for American forces to build a temporary port to deliver aid to Gaza by sea is a welcome idea, but he emphasized It is completely inadequate.

The writer considered that “like the airdrops of food supplies that Biden previously announced, they seem to him to be more like taking photographs than a comprehensive effort to address the humanitarian crisis that the United States helped create.”

The writer stressed that “Biden strongly supported what he acknowledged was an “exaggerated” war waged by Israel in Gaza, with the United States supplying Israel with weapons and protecting it diplomatically at the United Nations. Therefore, we support the war, but we are also now making relief efforts to mitigate its consequences.” .

Kristof said that the port or sea port “could actually be useful,” but the New York Times quoted officials as saying that preparing it may take more than a month or two. 20 people have already died in Gaza from malnutrition and dehydration, with hunger reaching “catastrophic levels,” according to the United Nations.

The writer emphasized that when children suffer from severe malnutrition, deaths can accelerate rapidly, and port may come too late for many of them. Likewise, airdrops are better than nothing, but they are small. The first airdrop included 38,000 meals, or one meal for less than 2% of Gaza’s population.”

He pointed out that the advantage of sea relief “is that ships can provide much more aid than airdrops.” But aid workers say the real problem is that Israel imposes an inspection process that hinders the delivery of aid to Gaza by truck and then targets civilian police officers (because they belong to Hamas), so they are unwilling to protect aid shipments.”

He stated that United Nations reports indicate that Israel sometimes attacked its aid convoys and prevented them, even if it had previously obtained approval from the Israeli authorities to deliver aid.

He considered that airdrops and seaports do not solve these distribution problems. He stressed, “It is not entirely clear how the aid arriving at the port will be transported through Gaza to the places where hunger is most severe, or who will protect the convoys, or how the final distribution will be managed.” It is clear that Israel will continue to examine aid coming by sea, which does not inspire confidence.”

“It is true that Hamas has stockpiled food that it can share and that Hamas can end the war by surrendering,” he claimed. But the United States has no influence on Hamas. It has influence over Israel, as its arms supplier and diplomatic protector.”

The writer wondered: Would Biden be willing to use his influence to pressure Israel to accelerate food aid to Gaza? He stressed, “This means stopping using the right to veto UN resolutions on Israel, slowing down military aid, and speaking directly to the Israeli people.” “This is the best hope of avoiding famine.”