Jerusalem:
Donald Trump announced on Tuesday his intention to “take charge” and “possess” Gaza, but despite the growing rhetoric of the president of the United States, there are overwhelming obstacles for his proposal.
The idea is aligned with other great schemes that has floated since he returned to the White House, including the annexation of Greenland or making Canada the 51st of the United States.
Here are five reasons why Trump’s Gaza proposal seems unfeasible:
– Palestinian roots –
Trump ignores the deep attachment of the Palestinians to his land. After Gaza’s fire, half a million displaced people ran north.
“This is the happiest day of my life,” said one of them, Lamees Al-Iwady, on January 28.
The UN Palestinian envoy, Riyad Mansour, ruled out the idea directly.
“Our homeland is our homeland,” he said. “For those who want to send them to a happy and pleasant place, let them return to their original homes within Israel, there are good places there, and they will be happy to return to these places.”
– Arab opposition –
Unlike Trump’s claims, Arab states have firmly rejected the plan.
On Saturday, Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates denounced any “infraction of inalienable rights” of the Palestinians.
The president of the Palestinian authority, Mahmud Abbas, went to Jordan on Wednesday to consult King Abdullah II, pointing out a deep concern in Amman and Ramallah.
Public opinion in the Arab states is also expected to be unanimously hostile to the proposal.
“Wait that reactions range from confusion to indignation, including demonstrations in the Middle East and beyond in the coming days,” Emily Harding wrote at the Center for Strategic and International Studies based in Washington in X.
– Intervention fatigue –
Trump’s proposal implies sending US troops to Gaza. Any deployment of this type would be an immediate reversal of a key campaign promise not to embroider Washington in foreign wars.
These forces would meet a fierce opposition of the Palestinian militants Hamas, very weakened for 15 months of war against Israel, but in no way were eradicated.
Hamas and his ally, the Islamic Jihad, have demonstrated the ability to maintain a violent insurgency against a conventional military force of the type that is coming in American memory after the military operations failed in Afghanistan, Iraq and Vietnam.
– International Law –
With an intervention in Gaza, Trump would destroy international law, the inheritance of the post -war international order that until recently Washington had proudly defended, at least in his rhetoric.
“The United States could only take control of Gaza with the consent of the sovereign authority of the territory. Israel cannot yield to the United States to Gaza,” said Tamer Morris, a specialist in International Law at the University of Sydney.
“A government, such as the Palestinian authority, cannot give this consent in the name of a people. People have the right to self -determination, the right to determine their own future,” Morris wrote on the conversation website.
The legal expert added even if Trump’s proposal does not reach a good end, his informal dismissal of international standards is detrimental to himself.
“The indifferent way that Trump is discussing things like taking charge of a territory and moving a population gives the impression that these rules can be easily broken, even if he does not break them himself,” said Morris.
Underlining the legal ramifications of Trump’s proposal, the United Nations reiterated international law strictly prohibits any expulsion of people from an occupied territory.
– Israeli caution –
While Netanyahu and his supporters have appeared emboldened by Trump’s statements, the broader political class of Israel has seemed cautious as the legislative elections look at a year.
“The extreme right is ecstatic, jubilant,” said David Khalfa, a Fondation Jean-Jauures researcher in Paris.
“The most moderate and centrist elements of Parliament congratulate Trump but express doubts about the viability of his plan.”
The researcher pointed out the comments of the opposition leader Yair Lapid after Trump’s announcement, emphasizing the need for Israeli leadership to present plans instead of trusting the United States.
Khalfa said that Lapid’s comments showed that the Israeli politician “believes that the plan is not at all realistic or even counterproductive.”
“Trump is fundamentally and, above all, a businessman,” said the researcher based in Paris.
And the president of the United States president was conceived as “a way of putting all players in the region on board, to get out of the Israeli-Palestinian confrontation, condemned to a repetition of the same tragedy,” he added.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a feed union).
By
