The ongoing conflict in Gaza has severely impacted agriculture, leaving only 1.5% of cropland available for cultivation, according to the United Nations. This figure has dropped from 4% in April, indicating continued destruction of farmland due to military actions. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) reported that Israel's blockade, which began in early March, has greatly restricted aid and access to food for the two million people living in Gaza.

Before the conflict escalated, Gaza was known for its rich agricultural production, providing a variety of fruits and vegetables. Agriculture contributed about 10% to the local economy and supported over half a million people. However, as of late July 2025, nearly 86% of farmland had been damaged by Israeli operations.

In northern Gaza specifically, Israeli military actions have devastated up to 94% of fertile land while access to the remaining land is blocked. In Rafah near Egypt's border, much of the area has also been flattened or rendered inaccessible.

Experts have raised alarms about a potential famine situation in Gaza. They emphasize that starvation is not due to a lack of food availability but rather because access is obstructed and local food systems have collapsed. The FAO director-general highlighted the urgent need for humanitarian aid and support for local agriculture to prevent further loss of life.

Warnings about deliberate mass starvation have been issued since early 2024 as Israel continues its campaign against local food production while blocking essential aid supplies. This situation has led to numerous deaths from starvation among Palestinians trying to secure food assistance amidst these restrictions.

Original article

Actionable Information: The article does not provide any immediate steps or actions that readers can take to address the situation in Gaza. It mainly focuses on describing the impact of the conflict and the resulting agricultural devastation. There are no clear instructions or tools mentioned that readers can utilize to make a difference or provide aid.

Educational Depth: While the article provides a detailed account of the ongoing conflict's impact on agriculture, it lacks depth in explaining the historical context, the root causes of the conflict, or the broader implications beyond the immediate crisis. It does not delve into the systems or policies that have led to this situation, which could provide a more comprehensive understanding for readers.

Personal Relevance: The topic of the article is highly relevant to readers who are concerned about global issues, human rights, and the impact of conflict on civilian populations. It highlights the devastating effects of military actions on a specific region's food security and economy, which can affect the lives and livelihoods of millions. This information is crucial for raising awareness and potentially influencing public opinion and policy.

Public Service Function: The article serves a public service by bringing attention to the dire situation in Gaza and the potential famine it faces. It quotes official sources like the United Nations and the Food and Agriculture Organization, providing a sense of urgency and credibility to the issue. However, it does not provide any direct resources or contacts for readers to access emergency aid or support.

Practicality of Advice: As the article does not offer any advice or recommendations, the practicality of its content cannot be assessed.

Long-Term Impact: By shedding light on the ongoing conflict and its impact on agriculture, the article contributes to long-term awareness and potentially influences future policies and aid efforts. It highlights the need for sustainable solutions and support for local agriculture to prevent further loss of life and economic devastation.

Emotional/Psychological Impact: The article may evoke strong emotions such as sadness, anger, or empathy in readers, especially those who are sensitive to human suffering and the impact of conflict. However, it does not provide any coping mechanisms or strategies to process these emotions, leaving readers with a sense of helplessness.

Clickbait/Ad-driven Words: The article does not appear to use sensational or exaggerated language to attract attention. It presents the information in a straightforward and factual manner, focusing on the severity of the situation without resorting to clickbait tactics.

Missed Opportunities to Teach/Guide: The article could have benefited from providing more context and depth by including historical background, interviews with experts, or personal stories from those affected. Additionally, offering resources or suggestions for readers who wish to take action, such as contacting humanitarian organizations or advocating for policy changes, would have added practical value.

The ongoing conflict and its impact on agriculture in Gaza present a dire situation that severely undermines the fundamental bonds of kinship and community survival. The destruction of farmland and the resulting food scarcity directly threaten the ability of families to provide for their basic needs, especially for the most vulnerable members: children and elders.

The loss of agricultural production, which once contributed significantly to the local economy and supported a substantial portion of the population, has now left many families struggling to access food. This not only weakens the physical health and resilience of the community but also erodes the social fabric that binds families together.

The described situation imposes a forced economic dependency, as families are now reliant on external aid and assistance to survive. This shifts the responsibility for caring and providing for the vulnerable from the immediate family and community to distant, impersonal entities, thereby fracturing the natural duties and trust within kinship bonds.

The potential famine situation, caused by restricted access to food and the collapse of local food systems, poses an immediate threat to the survival of the people. It undermines the ability of fathers and mothers to fulfill their primary duty of raising and nourishing their children, and it weakens the community's capacity to care for its elders.

The deliberate obstruction of aid and essential supplies, which has led to starvation and deaths, is a grave breach of the moral duty to defend the vulnerable and uphold clear personal responsibilities within the clan. This behavior not only breaks trust and kinship bonds but also endangers the very continuity of the people and their stewardship of the land.

If these behaviors and ideas are allowed to persist unchecked, the consequences for the community are dire. The erosion of family structures and the breakdown of community trust will lead to further suffering and loss of life. The land, once a source of sustenance and pride, will be neglected and abandoned, further exacerbating the crisis. The survival and prosperity of future generations, the very essence of community continuity, will be severely compromised.

To restore balance and protect the community, immediate action is required. This includes ensuring fair and unhindered access to food and resources, rebuilding local agricultural systems, and strengthening the bonds of kinship and community responsibility. It is through these actions that the people can reclaim their dignity, protect their vulnerable members, and secure the future of their clan and the land they call home.

"The ongoing conflict in Gaza has severely impacted agriculture..."

This sentence uses passive voice to describe the impact on agriculture. It doesn't directly blame Israel for the destruction, which could be seen as a way to avoid assigning responsibility. The use of "severely impacted" is a strong phrase that emphasizes the harm done, but it doesn't specify who or what caused this impact.

"...leaving only 1.5% of cropland available for cultivation..."

Here, the focus is on the result of the conflict, which is the limited availability of cropland. By highlighting this statistic, the text draws attention to the dire situation without explicitly mentioning the actions that led to it. This could be seen as a way to downplay the role of Israel's military actions.

The text evokes a range of emotions, primarily centered around sadness, anger, and fear. These emotions are interwoven throughout the narrative, painting a grim picture of the situation in Gaza.

Sadness is evident in the description of the impact on agriculture, a vital part of Gaza's economy and livelihood. The text mentions that nearly 86% of farmland has been damaged, leaving only a small fraction available for cultivation. This loss of agricultural productivity is a significant blow to the local community, affecting their ability to provide for themselves and their families. The sadness here is a deep, collective grief for the loss of a way of life and a source of sustenance.

Anger arises from the actions of Israel, which has imposed a blockade and restricted aid and access to food. The military actions have devastated fertile lands, and the deliberate obstruction of essential aid supplies has led to deaths from starvation. The text warns of a potential famine, emphasizing that it is not due to a lack of food but rather the obstruction of access. This anger is directed at the perceived injustice and the human suffering caused by these actions.

Fear is another prominent emotion, as the situation in Gaza is described as a potential famine, with experts raising alarms about mass starvation. The fear is not only for the immediate present but also for the future, as the collapse of local food systems threatens the long-term survival and well-being of the population.

These emotions are used to guide the reader's reaction by creating a sense of empathy and urgency. The text aims to evoke a strong emotional response, making the reader feel the weight of the crisis and the suffering of the people in Gaza. By highlighting the human cost of the conflict and the deliberate obstruction of aid, the writer seeks to build sympathy and a sense of moral obligation to address the situation.

The writer employs several persuasive techniques to enhance the emotional impact. One notable strategy is the use of precise and vivid language to describe the destruction and its consequences. Words like "devastated," "flattened," and "rendered inaccessible" paint a stark picture of the damage inflicted on the land and the people's lives. The repetition of phrases like "access is obstructed" and "local food systems have collapsed" emphasizes the severity of the situation and the urgency of the need for aid.

Additionally, the text provides specific details and statistics, such as the percentage of farmland damaged and the number of people affected, which adds credibility and a sense of reality to the narrative. By personalizing the impact, the writer humanizes the crisis, making it more relatable and compelling. The mention of Palestinians trying to secure food assistance amidst restrictions adds a layer of emotional depth, evoking a sense of determination and resilience in the face of adversity.

Overall, the emotional language and persuasive techniques employed in the text aim to engage the reader's empathy, evoke a sense of responsibility, and inspire action to address the dire situation in Gaza.