Donald Trump has lived up to his reputation as the ‘great disruptor’ by proposing to turn Gaza into the ‘Riviera of the Middle East’. In a groundbreaking shift from every existing diplomatic orthodoxy, Trump proposed that the USA take over Gaza, level the enclave and then develop it for the future. While this was happening, Palestinians would then be relocated to other countries in the region where they could build prosperous lives.
The president is right to argue that the West needs a paradigm shift in dealing with this protracted conflict. All the usual diplomatic solutions – an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, an immediate implementation of the two-state solution, ending settlements to create peace – have been rendered irrelevant after 7 October.
A two-state reality cannot be carved out of the wreckage of Gaza any time in the near future. Israel can certainly never have peace while a snarling, fanatical and genocidal adversary, ideologically fixated on murdering Jews, lurks behind a border and arms itself for the next conflict.
Certainly, the UN cannot play a meaningful role in dealing with this mess, given the vitriolic bias that has long permeated it. UNRWA too has fomented chaos and terror and needs to go.
Trump’s specific proposals seem scarcely workable, however. For one thing, they beg the question whether this relocation would be for the short or long term. Trump’s speech suggested a permanent move from the enclave whereas Marco Rubio walked back on this position later, suggesting it would be merely temporary. It does make sense for Palestinians to swap their shattered landscape for pastures new while Gaza is rebuilt, only to return later.
Furthermore, there is a huge difference between a voluntary exodus, which some Palestinians have already undertaken, and a coerced one, which looks rather like ethnic cleansing. But whether temporary and voluntary or permanent or forced, the plan can only succeed if surrounding nations like Egypt and Jordan agree to host the Palestinians.
Already, both countries, alongside the UAE and Saudi Arabia, have rejected the plan, doubtless fearful that the restive, impoverished and highly radicalised Gazans could unsettle their own populations. The fear of Muslim Brotherhood influence is pervasive in many Arab countries, not least in Egypt where the organisation is banned.
Moreover, Trump’s idea risks the fate of the remaining hostages, given that they are Hamas’ last remaining bargaining chip in any negotiation. One cannot forget that the rescue of the hostages, a popular policy in Israel, was the entire point of the ceasefire.
Trump’s idea risks the fate of the remaining hostages, given that they are Hamas’ last remaining bargaining chip in any negotiation
A better policy suggests itself. Gaza does need reconstruction and that must be on condition that Hamas no longer governs the enclave. UNRWA must be removed because it is a major source of radicalisation, namely by how it encourages Palestinian residents to see themselves as temporary refugees whose real home is in Israel.
New agencies must be brought in to administer basic essentials of life, among them UNESCO and the WHO, with Palestinians elsewhere overseen by the UNHCR. Trump is totally right to defund failing international institutions weighed down by anti-Israel bias, including the UN Human Rights Council.
When Palestinians return, they should buy housing units as residents of Gaza, not as refugees. This will give them a stake in the region, rather than seeing it as a temporary staging post to a life elsewhere.
Most importantly, there must be a long-term programme of deradicalisation in Gaza. A society which reveres child murderers and hostage takers, which glories in murdering Jews and which then elects genocidal Islamists to govern them, is sick to its core.
There can be no more ‘Pay for Slay’ in which the families of terrorist prisoners receive endless financial awards. There can be no more incitement to Jew hatred and so no more celebrations of Palestinian ‘martyrdom’ in the media and television. The West and moderate Arab states must condition aid on these objectives or their money will go to waste.
The failed status quo of recent decades must be shattered, exactly as Trump suggests. But quite how this is done is another matter.
