Media coverage
Sin Permiso · 2025-02-09
The pieces present the so-called Trump plan for Gaza as a proposal centered on taking over the Strip and displacing its population, arguing that it is politically and practically unworkable and ignores the historical and symbolic meaning of displacement for Palestinians. They contend that merely advancing the plan has emboldened Israel’s far right, weakened political and diplomatic alternatives, and increased the risk of renewed war while strengthening Hamas at the expense of the Palestinian Authority.
The pieces present the so-called Trump plan for Gaza as a proposal centered on taking over the Strip and displacing its population, arguing that it is politically and practically unworkable and ignores the historical and symbolic meaning of displacement for Palestinians. They contend that merely ad…
# Trump’s Plan for Gaza
Meir Margalit
For a couple of weeks, since the State Department announced an upcoming meeting between the US president and the Israeli prime minister, I had been waiting with great anticipation for Netanyahu’s trip to Washington and the proposal Trump would put on the table. I myself, like so many others, was torn between two states of mind—one based on the conviction that nothing good can be expected from this character, and another sustained by the hope that this time he would surprise us for the better. Indeed, a castaway in the ocean clings to anything he can find in order not to succumb, but we also had reasons to believe that Trump might put an end to this madness: we owe the hostage-prisoner exchange initiated last January to Trump, which gave us an indication that perhaps this time he would be willing to bring this whole ordeal to an end. Once again, naivety has cost us dearly.
The Trump that emerges in his plan for Gaza is more unbalanced than we could have supposed. The idea of “taking possession of the Strip,” displacing 1.8 million inhabitants to neighboring Arab countries, in order to finish destroying what remains standing and then build “the Riviera of the Middle East,” is so absurd, delirious, and ridiculous that I would not know whether to laugh or cry. All the contemptuous terms we might seek to define this laughable plan fall short in the face of such nonsense. There is no doubt that Trump has not the slightest idea of the symbolic weight contained in the notion of displacement/transfer for the people of Gaza, the vast majority of whom are second- and third-generation descendants of the Nakba of ’48, and he is unaware of the concept, vital in Palestinian culture, of Sumud (steadfastness on the land). Once again, we return to the model, so worn out, by which Israelis and Americans decide what is best for the Palestinians, only for the Palestinians—after rejecting these outlandish proposals—to be accused of sabotaging peace.
One would have to be very, very disconnected from reality to present such a far-fetched plan, impossible to implement, given that no Arab country is willing to receive hundreds of thousands of displaced Gazans; and the inhabitants of Gaza themselves are not willing to abandon their land. But this plan, however fanciful it may be, has already provoked two worrying reactions.
First, in Israel the right is euphoric, taking Trump’s promise literally and asserting that the conditions are now in place to renew its military attack and complete what was begun 15 months ago, namely: the total destruction of Gaza. For them, the Trump plan represents an opportunity to consummate their maximalist vision of territorial expansion and the annexation of the West Bank. The nationalist ranks are already warming up to resume the attacks once this first phase of the hostage exchange is concluded, while the messianic right is already packing its bags to resettle in the Gaza Strip. Needless to say, if the bombings continue, the chances of rescuing the kidnapped people still being held captive alive will be minimal. In short, the Trump plan reinforces the most extreme tendencies within Israel, and leaves the country even more trapped in an open-ended war.
Second, in Gaza, faced with the contempt that the Trump plan represents, Hamas has no choice but to keep fighting, knowing that it will pay a high price, but also feeling that it no longer has anything to lose. Because the only way to stop the next Palestinian attack is by offering them some hope, and what Trump has done is push them to a point of desperation where they have no alternative left but to keep fighting. More than that, this humiliation will not only reinforce Hamas’s intransigent position, but could also further radicalize sectors of the population that, in another context, might seek alternatives other than armed resistance. By ruling out any viable option for the future of Gaza and its inhabitants, the Trump plan strengthens Hamas’s narrative that the only path remaining is war. Consequently, we can expect an intensification of the conflict, with more attacks, more bombings, and a spiral of violence that will push any possibility of agreement further away.
This situation not only strengthens Hamas, which, at least in terms of image, can position itself as the only faction willing to save Palestinian dignity, but it also further undermines the legitimacy of the Palestinian Authority (PA), which loses prominence and is exposed as a weak and irrelevant factor. This process suits the Israeli far right perfectly, since what it wants most is to wear down the PA in order to annex its lands and put an end once and for all to the idea of a future Palestinian state. The Trump plan and the contempt toward any viable political solution reinforce the perception that the diplomatic path is dead, which leaves the Palestinian population with more reasons to turn toward armed resistance. In this way, Hamas becomes the only protagonist capable of capitalizing on the frustration and fury of the Palestinian population.
At this stage of events, the greatest concern haunting me is the future of the next phase of the prisoner exchange, which is due to begin next month. The only formula that would make their release possible would be for Israel to commit to ending the siege and withdrawing from the territories occupied during the war, a demand unacceptable to Israel, which will lead to an intensification of military operations. Here the possibility comes into play that Trump will once again pressure Israel to end this phase of the war, adopt Saudi Arabia’s proposal that a pan-Arab force take control of the Gaza Strip and begin its reconstruction with funding from Riyadh and Qatar. In this way, Trump is betting on a major geopolitical maneuver, aimed at de-escalating the conflict without generating panic on the Israeli right and then moving in the direction that really interests him, the $3 trillion in Saudi investment he spoke so much about during his election campaign.
This episode embodies another blow to the Israeli peace movement. Once again, the United States has frustrated us, and the Israeli right has got its way. It becomes difficult to keep pushing uphill when all the initiatives that arise along the way end up leading to a dead end. I could not say how we are to overcome this new blow. A popular saying goes that “when a fool throws a stone into the sea, not even a dozen wise men will be able to retrieve it.” We are far from being “wise,” but even at this crossroads, I have no doubt whatsoever that we must keep swimming against the current.
Source: www.sinpermiso.info, 7 February 2025
## The Damage the Trump Plan for Gaza Has Already Caused
Meron Rapoport
In September 2020, toward the end of his first term as president, Donald Trump oversaw the signing of the Abraham Accords between Israel, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain on the White House lawn. The accords, to which Sudan and Morocco would also become parties in the following months, were proclaimed as “peace agreements,” but it would have been more accurate to label them “agreements to marginalize the Palestinian people.” Their aim was not to achieve peace—there was no war between these states in the first place—but to establish a new regional reality in which the struggle for the liberation of Palestine would be marginalized and, ultimately, forgotten.
The four and a half years that followed have been the bloodiest in the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Half a year after the accords were signed, Israeli forces attacked worshippers during Ramadan at Al-Aqsa Mosque and mobilized to evict Palestinian families from the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of Jerusalem, triggering a barrage of rockets from Hamas from Gaza and an eruption of intercommunal violence between Jews (backed by Israeli soldiers and police) and Palestinians that flooded the entire land between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River for the first time since 1948. 2022 and 2023 saw a record number of Palestinians killed by Israeli soldiers and settlers, as well as an increase in attacks against Israelis. Then came 7 October, the ultimate proof that trying to marginalize the Palestinian struggle is like ignoring the dividing line on a highway: it ends in a fatal collision.
Whether Trump understands this or not, the message of his new approach is essentially this: if we cannot sideline the Palestinians, we will expel them. “I heard Gaza has been very unlucky for them,” he said at a joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu earlier this week, adding that therefore it would be better if the entire population of the Strip moved to a “good, fresh, beautiful piece of land.”
One of the first criteria by which the idea has been examined is its viability. By this criterion, it obviously fails. The chances that more than 2 million Palestinians, most of them refugees or descendants of refugees from the Nakba of 1948, who for 75 years have remained in refugee camps in Gaza rather than abandon their homeland, would now agree to leave it are close to zero.
The likelihood that countries such as Jordan or Egypt would accept even a fraction of that population is equally slim, since such a measure could destabilize their regimes. And the idea that the United States, after ending the long, costly, and deadly occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan, would now be willing to “own” Gaza, govern it, and develop it seems just as implausible.
But this plan is worse than the sum of its parts. Even if it does not advance an inch, it has already had a profound impact on Jewish-Israeli political discourse. In fact, it might be more accurate to say that Trump’s proposal has tapped into a deep underlying current in Jewish-Israeli society.
President Donald Trump meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House in Washington, D.C., 4 February 2025. (Liri Agami/Flash90)
Standing beside Trump at the press conference, Netanyahu was the first to welcome the president’s initiative. “This is the kind of thinking that can reshape the Middle East and bring peace,” he proclaimed. To no one’s surprise, the leaders of Israel’s messianic right also rushed to express their own jubilation at the proposal, treating Trump’s press conference as though it were a divine revelation. But they were far from the only ones.
Benny Gantz, who resigned from the government over the direction of the war in Gaza, described Trump’s transfer plan as “creative, original, and interesting.” Yair Lapid, head of the centrist Yesh Atid party, called the press conference “good for Israel.” Yair Golan, leader of the left-wing Zionist Democrats party, merely commented on the impracticability of the idea. It was as if politicians across the Zionist spectrum had simply been waiting for the moment when ethnic cleansing received a “Made in the USA” stamp of approval before embracing it.
This poison will not be purged from Israel’s bloodstream in the short term. And the consequences of ethnic cleansing could be catastrophic for the entire region.
## There Are No Incentives for Negotiations
Even without American boots on the ground, the sense that Israel has stumbled upon a historic opportunity to empty the Gaza Strip of its Palestinian inhabitants will give a huge boost to the demands of Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir, who are pressing Netanyahu to exploit the ceasefire before it reaches its second phase, conquer Gaza, and rebuild the Jewish settlements in the Strip. Netanyahu, who seemed somewhat embarrassed by Trump’s brutal frankness, also favors the idea of “thinning out” Gaza’s population and may well yield to these demands, especially amid fears that he could be left without a coalition.
As for the Israeli army, a senior official was quoted by the Israeli news site Ynet describing Trump’s initiative as “an excellent idea.” Meanwhile, the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), the military body responsible for overseeing humanitarian affairs in Gaza and the West Bank, has already begun drawing up the plans. If, for example, Egypt refuses to allow the Rafah crossing to be used to facilitate the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, the army can open other routes “by sea or land and from there to an airport to transfer the Palestinians to the destination countries.”
Even if the ceasefire advances to phases two and three — all the hostages are released, the army withdraws from Gaza, and a permanent ceasefire is achieved — Trump’s plan will not disappear from Jewish-Israeli politics. What incentive would any government or party have to push for a political settlement with the Palestinians if the Jewish public sees their expulsion as a viable alternative? Every agreement, every ceasefire, could come to be seen as nothing more than a temporary step toward the ultimate goal of mass transfer. The chances for effective Jewish-Palestinian political cooperation would be significantly reduced.
And why stop with Gaza? There is no particular reason why Trump’s proposal could not be expanded to Palestinians in the West Bank, an area he likely also considers “very unfortunate” for them, or East Jerusalem, or even Nazareth.
Israeli flags are seen in the Philadelphi Corridor between the southern Gaza Strip and Egypt, July 15, 2024. (Oren Cohen/Flash90)
On the Palestinian street, Trump’s plan will only further undermine any notion of reconciliation with Israel. Sometimes enthusiastically, sometimes grudgingly, but since the Oslo Accords in 1993 (and even before that), the Palestinian political leadership has affirmed the possibility of living alongside a state that was born through mass displacement and atop the ruins of its own people in 1948. Certainly, this was never straightforward; there were many obstacles, much duplicity, and much violent opposition, most notably from Hamas, but this approach remained dominant for decades.
Once the U.S. president proposes transfer as the solution to the “Palestinian problem,” and once all of Israel, from the religious-fascist right to the liberal center and even the Zionist left, embraces it, the message to Palestinians is clear: there is no possibility of compromise with Israel and its American patron, at least in their current form, because they are determined to eliminate the Palestinian people.
This does not necessarily mean that masses of Palestinians will immediately turn to armed struggle, though that is a potential outcome. But it will certainly make it impossible for any Palestinian leader trying to reach an agreement with Israel to retain popular support. The legitimacy of the Palestinian Authority is already in the gutter; by reentering a political process with Israel under the shadow of Trump’s plan, it will only deteriorate further.
## A Recipe for a General Regional War
And the danger does not end there. Trump, in his complete ignorance of the Middle East (throughout the press conference, he repeatedly declared that “both Arabs and Muslims” would benefit from the prosperity his plan would bring), has “regionalized” the Palestinian question, viewing its resolution not as a matter of Jews and Palestinians living between the river and the sea, but instead offloading this responsibility onto the surrounding states. He is not only demanding that Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and other countries decide to accept hundreds of thousands of Palestinians into their territories, but is also effectively asking them to sign off on the burial of the Palestinian cause.
Such a demand is a direct threat to regimes across the Arab world. The Jordanian government fears that a significant influx of Palestinians into its kingdom could bring about its downfall by shifting the country’s delicate demographic balance, which already tilts heavily toward Palestinians. But even in other countries with a less direct connection to Palestine, the situation is just as fragile. One only had to watch the Saudi news channels on the day of Trump’s announcement to understand the level of shock, threat, and fear surrounding this move.
Fifteen years before the PLO reached a historic compromise with the State of Israel, Egypt had concluded that it could not only accept Israel’s existence in the region, but might also benefit from it, and signed the 1979 peace treaty. Jordan followed suit, and four and a half years ago, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco adopted the same line of thinking. Even without having officially normalized its relations with Israel, Saudi Arabia, the regional heavyweight, appears to have reached a similar conclusion.
But Trump’s wrecking movement, and Israel’s instinctive acceptance of it, could indicate to Middle Eastern regimes, including those labeled “moderate” (which, in reality, are often more autocratic than the rest), that compromise is useless. It suggests that Israel, thanks to its military power and the backing of the United States, believes it can impose any solution it desires in the region, including the forced displacement of millions of people from their homeland and the denial of their almost universally recognized right to self-determination.
Over the past year and a half, Israel was not satisfied with the mass killings in Gaza and the destruction of the infrastructure necessary for human life. It also occupied parts of Lebanon, and refuses to withdraw in violation of the ceasefire agreement; and it has occupied parts of Syria with no intention of leaving anytime soon. This reality only reinforces the impression that Israel has decided it can establish a new order in the Middle East through force, without any agreement and without any negotiation.
The 1973 war was the last time Israel fought the armies of sovereign states rather than non-state militant organizations, which have always been much weaker. Even if Israeli history textbooks now claim that Israel bore no responsibility for that war, there is no doubt that Egypt and Syria initiated it because they realized there was no possibility of peacefully recovering the territories that Israel had occupied in 1967.
The path Israel is now following, under Trump’s influence, could lead it to the same place, and to its neighbors concluding that Israel only understands force. Indeed, Middle East Eye cited sources in Amman as saying that Jordan is prepared to declare war on Israel if Netanyahu attempts to forcibly transfer Palestinian refugees to its territory.
This is not inevitable, of course. It depends greatly on Trump’s whim and on how determined he is to press ahead with his statements in the face of global opposition. Resistance must come not only from the Palestinians, but also from Jews in Israel who understand that they have no future here without living in equality with the native inhabitants of this land. It could also emerge in the form of new coalitions in the Middle East and beyond that refuse to accept American dictates.
What is clear is that Trump’s bellicose plans, and Israel’s pathetic attempt to ride the wave, carry the very real risk of being resisted by force. And that would be disastrous for everyone.
Source: https://www.972mag.com/trump-gaza-damage-israeli-society/
Translation: Enrique García
Palestinian opinion on Trump’s ethnic cleansing planMahmoud Mushtaha
Khaled Al-Dawoodi sits on the floor of a crowded room in his neighbor’s house in southern Gaza, watching a grainy television screen. A generator hums in the background, and the smell of kerosene hangs in the air. The news is playing a clip of President Donald Trump standing beside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and saying: “We’re going to take control of the Gaza Strip. We will own it.”
Al-Dawoodi shakes his head. His home was bombed months ago by the Israeli military, and since then he has been forced to move from one shelter to another with his wife and three children. He lets out a dry laugh. “Take Gaza? Haven’t they already done that?”
Trump’s words, delivered casually, have sparked shock and outrage around the world. Some dismiss his proposal as a mere soundbite. Others warn of the deeper ramifications for regional stability. Human rights groups call it a clear violation of international law.
Yet in Gaza, most people barely blinked. Fifteen months of relentless Israeli bombardment and siege have left the Strip in ruins. Hunger is everywhere. The healthcare system has collapsed. Even with the ceasefire, there is still a severe shortage of clean water and fuel, and there is no way out.
Moreover, Palestinians have heard this kind of talk for generations: statements by Israeli and Western leaders that treat our land and our lives as something to be negotiated, taken from us, or erased from the map altogether. The idea of “owning” Gaza is not only an absurd political statement, but also represents the latest iteration of a century-long campaign to erase Palestinian existence.
Legally speaking, Trump’s words fit into a broader pattern of violations of international law by the United States and Israel. The forced transfer of a civilian population is a war crime, while legal experts say that Israel’s actions over the past 15 months (bombing homes, pushing people toward the southern border, restricting aid to impose famine) already meet the criteria for ethnic cleansing and genocide.
Palestinians return to Jabalia amid the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, in northern Gaza, January 19, 2025. (Omar El Qataa)
The United States has long played a decisive role in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as Israel’s principal backer. During his first presidency, Trump took that support to new extremes: moving the United States embassy to Jerusalem, cutting aid to Palestinian refugees, and recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights.
Since returning to office less than three weeks ago, he has lifted U.S. sanctions on violent Israeli settlers, sought an additional billion dollars for U.S. arms sales to Israel, and pushed to permanently shut off U.S. funding to UNRWA, the main aid agency supporting Palestinian refugees. Now, he is predicting a new Nakba.
“We are still here. We are still Palestinians”
In the streets of Gaza, Palestinians responded to Trump’s words with a mix of anger, exhaustion, and dark humor. Many of those who spoke with +972 see it as further proof that global powers treat their lives as disposable. Others worry that such rhetoric could pave the way for even more displacement.
Mahmoud Al-Shurafa, a 43-year-old fisherman from Gaza City, leans on his battered boat, staring out at the sea. “Take Gaza? We can’t even take our boats more than a few miles out without the Israeli navy shooting at us,” he says. Fishing was once his family’s livelihood, but Israel’s restrictions, even before October 7, have made it nearly impossible to sustain. “They already control everything: our water, our land, our air. What more do they want?”
Lina Al-Safadi, a 21-year-old university student whose dreams of studying abroad were shattered by the war, sees Trump’s words as reinforcing the idea that Palestinians have no authority over their own fate. “We are not an abandoned building that someone can claim ownership over. We are people. We belong to this land.”
In Rafah, Umm Ayman watches her children play in the dust outside her makeshift tent. She has already been displaced three times since the war began. “I was born a refugee, and now my children will be refugees too,” she says. The idea of being forced out of Gaza terrifies her. “Where would we go? Egypt does not want us. Israel does not want us. Does Trump think he can decide our fate? We will not leave.”
Displaced Palestinians inspect their tents, which were hit by an Israeli airstrike in the Al-Mawasi area, October 15, 2024. (Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90)
For shop owner Abu Saleh, economic survival has become a daily battle. “Gaza…
Text © Sin Permiso — archived here with attribution to the source. — Machine translation for archival reference. — Original source