Finnish opposition politicians and development organisations are urging the government to reconsider its decision to end direct funding for the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees, warning that redirecting aid through other organisations may not compensate for the extensive network UNRWA has built across Gaza and the occupied Palestinian territories.
Finland has contributed EUR 5 million a year to UNRWA under a funding agreement covering 2023 to 2026. On 27 August, Foreign Trade and Development Minister Ville Tavio announced that Finland would not renew the agreement after it expires. The government has stressed that Finland’s overall support for the Palestinian territories will not be reduced, with funding instead channelled through organisations including the World Food Programme.
That explanation has not satisfied critics of the decision. Opposition MPs and Finnish civil society organisations say the question is not simply how much money Finland provides, but whether other humanitarian agencies can realistically take over the role UNRWA has developed over decades.
Green League MP Inka Hopsu has called on the government to reverse its decision, arguing that no other organisation has the same combination of personnel, infrastructure, logistics and operational presence in the Palestinian territories.
The dispute comes after a turbulent period for Finland’s relationship with UNRWA. Israel has accused the agency of having links to Hamas and has taken measures to restrict its activities. Finland suspended its funding in January 2024 following allegations involving UNRWA employees. Payments resumed in March after Finland reviewed the agency’s safeguards, with 10 per cent of the funding earmarked for additional oversight.
Fingo, a Finnish development organisation, has questioned what has changed since that assessment. Its executive director Linda Konate said the government has not publicly explained what new evidence or evaluation prompted the decision to end direct funding now, while humanitarian needs in Gaza remain severe.
The organisation has also pointed to proceedings at the International Court of Justice concerning Israel’s obligations towards the United Nations and humanitarian organisations operating in the occupied Palestinian territory. The UN General Assembly asked the court to examine Israel’s obligations concerning the presence and activities of UN bodies, including UNRWA. Documents submitted to the proceedings describe the agency as a central component of humanitarian operations serving Palestinian refugees.
Fingo argues that the court’s findings in October 2025 did not support some of the allegations that have been used to cast doubt on the distinction between UNRWA and Hamas. It has questioned why issues that Finland considered sufficiently addressed when funding was restored in 2024 are now being used to justify withdrawing direct support.
Johannes Hautaviita, Fingo’s international policy specialist, said Tavio had previously concluded that UNRWA’s safeguards offered adequate assurances for Finland to continue financing the agency.
The Social Democratic Party has also criticised the government’s decision. MP Kimmo Kiljunen said Finland risked weakening the wider UN humanitarian system at a time when UNRWA is facing growing pressure, including the withdrawal of funding by the United States and restrictions imposed by Israel on the agency’s operations.
Kiljunen has argued that Finland should maintain long-term support for humanitarian organisations working in Gaza rather than take steps that could reduce their capacity to operate.
The Finnish-Palestinian organisation Sumud has gone further in its criticism, accusing Finland of contributing to efforts to dismantle UNRWA and describing the funding decision as part of what it calls Finland’s complicity in Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Sumud has also called for Finland to end military cooperation with Israel and support the suspension of preferential trade arrangements between Israel and the European Union.
The pressure on UNRWA has intensified alongside Israeli measures against the organisation. Shortly before Finland announced its funding decision, Israeli forces entered and seized UNRWA’s Qalandiya vocational training centre in occupied East Jerusalem and removed staff from the premises. UNRWA said the action violated the protections afforded to United Nations facilities.
For the Finnish government, the position is that humanitarian assistance to Palestinians will continue even without direct funding for UNRWA. The government says money can be channelled through other humanitarian organisations while maintaining Finland’s overall level of support.
Critics see a different problem. They argue that funding cannot be assessed only by comparing the amount of money allocated to different agencies. UNRWA operates a long-established system of staff, facilities and logistical networks designed specifically to serve Palestinian refugees. Replacing that system through several other organisations may not be straightforward, particularly in Gaza, where humanitarian operations face enormous practical constraints.
The scale of UNRWA’s existing role is reflected in its own figures. Its clinics in Gaza recorded 19.3 million visits between October 2023 and July 2026. In July alone, around 800,000 people relied on UNRWA for water assistance, while approximately 65,000 displaced people were staying in emergency shelters operated by the agency.
Those figures have become central to the argument over Finland’s decision. Supporters of continued funding say the question is not whether Finland will continue giving humanitarian aid, but whether withdrawing direct support from UNRWA risks weakening an organisation whose infrastructure is already operating on the ground.
The government has chosen a different route, maintaining that Finland’s humanitarian commitment to Palestinians will remain intact through other channels. The growing opposition to the decision suggests that the debate is unlikely to be settled by the funding figure alone. It is increasingly a question of whether the organisations receiving redirected Finnish aid can provide the same reach, infrastructure and continuity as UNRWA in a humanitarian crisis where those capabilities remain in high demand.
