Trump’s Gaza ‘plan’: What it is, why it’s unworkable and globally rejected

Former U.S. President Donald Trump recently made remarks suggesting that the United States should "take over" and "own" the Gaza Strip, sparking widespread controversy. This article will delve into Trump's proposal and the various reactions it has elicited, offering a comprehensive analysis of the situation.

Trump's proposal primarily revolves around the United States controlling the Gaza Strip, relocating its residents, and "rebuilding" it. He suggested moving Gaza's 2.3 million residents to Egypt and Jordan, claiming they would "live better there." Furthermore, he envisioned transforming Gaza into the "Riviera of the Middle East" and ruled out the possibility of a Palestinian-led government, arguing that "Hamas has made the situation too bad, too dangerous, and too unfair to the people."

However, Trump's proposal has been met with widespread criticism. Human rights organizations condemned his suggestion of forcibly relocating the population as constituting ethnic cleansing, a violation of international law. Palestinians strongly opposed the proposal, asserting that Gaza is their home, and the proposal disregards their rights and historical connection to the land. A 60-year-old father living in Gaza stated that he would not leave even if borders were opened and voluntary emigration opportunities were provided.

Hamas called Trump's proposal "ridiculous and laughable," while Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas deemed it a "serious violation of international law." Nevertheless, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised Trump's proposal as innovative during the same press conference, considering it to be of a "higher level" and worth exploring. Israel stated that Gaza poses a threat to its security, and eliminating potential threats is a key objective of the current war.

Despite Trump's outlined vision, he does not actually possess the legal, military, or diplomatic authority to implement the plan. Gaza is not U.S. territory, and the U.S. has no jurisdiction over it. Moreover, experts believe that the United States would not invest the necessary financial and logistical resources to achieve this goal. Neighboring countries such as Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia have also clearly rejected the proposal. Therefore, Trump's proposal is difficult to realize in reality and is contrary to international law.