Israel US closes makeshift port off Gaza coast
The USA is finally discontinuing the operation of a temporary port off the coast of the Gaza Strip. The mission has ended, the responsible regional command of the US military announced. An alternative route for the delivery of aid supplies to the sealed-off coastal strip is planned via the port of Ashdod in Israel. However, no details were initially known.
17.07.2024, 21:32
SDA
The pier was intended to be a temporary solution from the outset. However, there have been repeated problems since it was put into operation in May. Heavy seas had severely damaged the pier on the coast of the Gaza Strip, which was part of the temporary solution. The distribution of relief supplies for the suffering population in the Gaza Strip also proved to be more than difficult.
The representative of the US regional command Centcom nevertheless tried to portray the project as a success. According to the US military, the pier had achieved the intended effect, "namely to bring a very large amount of aid into the Gaza Strip and to ensure that the aid reached the civilian population in the Gaza Strip quickly".
Due to Israel's war against the Islamist Hamas, there has been great humanitarian need in the Gaza Strip for months. Trucks carrying aid reached the Gaza Strip for the first time on May 17 via the temporary port. The Pentagon estimates the cost of the port at around 300 million US dollars (276 million euros).
Expectations for the project were high: the Pentagon had originally assumed that around 90 truckloads per day could initially reach the Gaza Strip via the port. At a later stage, this figure was to rise to 150 truckloads per day.
Freighters initially brought aid supplies from Cyprus to a floating platform a few kilometers off the coast of the Gaza Strip. The goods were then loaded onto smaller ships that could sail closer to the coast. These finally docked at the pier attached to the coast, from where the supplies were to be received and distributed by aid organizations.
Aid organizations had welcomed the construction of the facility, but pointed out that transport by land was much more efficient. The US government emphasized that the corridor across the Mediterranean would not replace aid deliveries by land and air, but merely supplement them.
