One Siege, Two Fronts: How U.S. Power Shapes Gaza and the American Security State

The crisis in Gaza is no longer limited to military operations backed by U.S. weapons and diplomatic support. American involvement now extends into the structure of the siege itself, including the use of private contractors, control over humanitarian aid, and the deployment of surveillance systems.

Meanwhile, a separate security campaign is unfolding inside the United States. The Department of Homeland Security, through Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), is deploying biometric devices to monitor and track individuals. At the same time, it is targeting safe spaces such as residential neighborhoods and carrying out mass deportations that resemble a coordinated population removal effort.

Aid and Enforcement on the Ground

Since May, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a U.S.-based organization backed by the State Department, has overseen food distribution in military-controlled areas of Gaza. United Nations agencies have described the operation as part of a broader effort to weaponize food, using aid as a tool of control rather than relief. American contractors guard their sites under firms like UG Solutions and Safe Reach Solutions. Contractors have reported frequent, systematic use of live ammunition, stun grenades, and pepper spray against people trying to collect food. The firms currently deny these allegations.

Cable news networks have mainly avoided framing the destruction in Gaza as part of a broader strategy to depopulate the area and reshape it under the pretext of security.

These operations are not improvised. They follow a model of crowd management that treats aid like a security mission. Cameras and facial recognition systems operated by U.S. contractors are used to track “persons of interest,” with the data shared directly with Israeli forces. The result is hunger being managed by armed control, not alleviated by relief.

Media Framing

U.S. media is full of stories about American aid dropping into Gaza, emphasizing coordination and relief. Coverage declares that millions of meals have been delivered. What is seldom discussed are allegations that these operations employ the same tactics as military occupations, including armed checkpoints, surveillance, and restricted access to necessities.

Coverage of other civilian tragedies in Gaza, such as the bombing of a seaside café or the killing of Dr. Marwan al-Sultan while he was directing a hospital, is often sparse, brief, and presented without political context. Meanwhile, televised segments about aid distribution are framed as humanitarian triumphs. The result is a distorted picture that hides the U.S.’ role in transforming humanitarian aid into controlled violence.

Institutionalized Civilian Targeting

Gaza’s healthcare system is collapsing. Dozens of medical workers have been killed in airstrikes, and hospitals have been reduced to rubble. The bombing of places like the coastal café, where families and children gathered, shows how civilian spaces are being deliberately erased. These are not military sites or areas of active combat. Their destruction appears intended to break down ordinary life and push people toward displacement. Dr. Marwan al-Sultan, a respected cardiologist and director of the Indonesian Hospital, was the 70th healthcare worker killed by Israeli strikes in just 50 days, according to Palestinian medical organizations.

In much of the U.S. media, these events are framed as accidents or isolated tragedies, often presented alongside official statements from the Israeli government and vague promises of investigation. Rarely are they balanced with independent or opposing perspectives, such as the claim that hospitals and civilian infrastructure are being deliberately targeted. While outlets like Reuters have published some reporting on these issues, such coverage remains rare among major U.S. media platforms. Cable news networks have mainly avoided framing the destruction in Gaza as part of a broader strategy to depopulate the area and reshape it under the pretext of security.

Domestic Mirroring

Inside the U.S. public sphere, a new wave of repression has emerged. What has been called the “Palestine exception” has taken hold, where pro-Palestinian speech on campuses, in academic work, and advocacy is regularly treated as suspicious or subject to punishment. At the same time, similar expressions on other issues are largely ignored.

Reports from Council on American-Islamic Relations show a record-high spike in anti-Muslim incidents in 2024, directly linked to backlash over the war in Gaza. This surge has also been reflected in the wave of Islamophobic rhetoric that followed Zohran Mamdani’s victory in New York City’s Democratic primary for mayor.

Just as Palestinians in Gaza are placed at risk simply by going to food distribution sites, an act they are expected to perform, migrants in the United States face detention when attending immigration hearings or routine check-ins they are required to complete.

Against this backdrop, ICE has expanded its use of biometric surveillance tools, including facial recognition, mobile fingerprint scanners, and iris scans. These technologies closely resemble those used by U.S. contractors in Gaza to monitor aid recipients and flag individuals for Israeli forces. In both cases, the tools serve a similar purpose. They identify, track, and remove targeted populations under the justification of security.

Just as Palestinians in Gaza are placed at risk simply by going to food distribution sites, an act they are expected to perform, migrants in the United States face detention when attending immigration hearings or routine check-ins they are required to complete. Like reports of U.S. contractors deploying flash-bang grenades during aid distribution in Gaza, ICE has used the same tactics in residential areas during militarized domestic operations.

Displacement Without Being Named

In both Gaza and the United States, forced displacement is rarely acknowledged for what it is. Media coverage presents it through isolated incidents—airstrikes, deportations, legal actions—detached from the larger pattern of population removal.

In Gaza, proposals to move Palestinians to Egypt or other countries are described as humanitarian efforts or part of rebuilding plans. These descriptions overlook the systematic destruction of homes, hospitals, and neighborhoods. The coverage treats these as consequences of war, not as part of a coordinated effort to make civilian life impossible.

In the United States, deportations are reported through legal categories. Media narratives focus on status or procedure, rather than the coercive structure behind them. The focus is on expulsion, not immigration reform or options for legal integration.

The systems operating in Gaza and across the U.S. do not exist to keep people safe. They exist to manage, displace, and contain populations deemed problematic. The primary beneficiaries are those who build and maintain these systems, such as defense contractors, private surveillance firms, border security consultants, and the officials who award them contracts.

The more threats these systems claim to identify, the more funding they receive. The more disorder it produces, the more authority it demands. From Gaza to cities across the U.S., the goal is not resolution. It is control. And control is profitable.