‘Trump Gaza Proposal Was Pre-Meditated With Israel’

In an article in the Palestine Chronicle: “Arab Consensus Challenges Trump’s Ethnic Cleansing ‘Proposal’ for Gaza”, Dr. Mohannad Mustafa from the Haifa University’s School of Political Sciences exposes the raison d'être behind Trump’s original proposal’ for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, and what now appears his intent to back away.

Mohannad Mustafa avers that Trump’s plan was not a mere afterthought. It was pre-meditated. Trump had wanted “to implement (the plan) since the beginning of the assault. The Israel far-right had embraced the idea with great zest after it was clandestinely agreed upon between the US and Israel. In the thick of war, Israel’s Ministry of Intelligence had developed a meticulous plan for the extinction of Palestinians from Gaza and sending them to several countries - not just in the region, but even in lands far from Palestine.

Dr. Mustafa describes the plan as one that was, in fact, one of the unofficial objectives of the war”. In the event of a victory, which would have left Gaza battered-beyond-reconstruction, Israel’s Ministry of Intelligence had prepared a detailed plan for the deportation set-up in Gaza. This gives further credence to the suspicion that this was Trump’s plan and that he had no intention to be a peacemaker. In his mind, he willed to be just another land grabber much like his colonialist collaborators. But he wore the garb of a ‘solution finder’.

His threat that all “hell would break loose” if the fighting did not end on the day he assumed Presidency, was meant to be a threat to Hamas fighters, and the people of Gaza. Mohannad Mustafa reports that the Institute for Jewish Peoplehood Policies found that 53% of Israeli Jews supported the proposal and its implementation, while 30% supported it but thought it not viable. Clearly, there was a build-up to the plan to ethnically cleanse Gaza. Very few Israeli’s expressed qualms about this malevolent plan. The Peace Movement, though convinced of its mischievous intent, was simply too feeble to make a difference.

The plan had acquired broad consensus among policy makers to the extent that the Israeli Security Cabinet officially adopted Trump’s plan during its first meeting after Netanyahu’s return from the USA. Israel had jumped the gun when it thought that it was rid of the Gaza imbroglio once and for all. But foolishly! Dr. Mustafa writes that Netanyahu publicly conceded that Israel had worked with the US administration in shaping the plan and influenced Trump’s position on it. The plan lies down in the dumps as deadwood, and has no chance, whatsoever, of turning up.

When Trump eventually pulled back from the plan in a policy, he had to rationalize his conclusion. His reversal included a lame statement saying that “he would not impose it but only recommend it”. That was not only patronizing, but a downright perversion of the facts. The droves of displaced Gazans who returned to their battered homes in Northern Gaza clearly showed that, despite the mauling they received during the war, the death-count, and destruction of basic infrastructure, they were not going anywhere. Gaza was theirs and they were there to stay. They declared in no uncertain terms that “Gaza is not for sale” referring to Trump’s dodgy proposal to turn Gaza into a “Riviera of the Middle East”.

The Arab League was decisive. They would find a relevant resolution that fitted in with the realities of the region. Jordan nor Egypt declared they would not accept Palestinians if they were forcibly displaced. And they had good reason. The Egyptian regime knows full well the Palestinians in Gaza will not stop resisting until all of Palestine is liberated. If Hamas attacks Israel from the Egyptian Sinai, Israel would respond with military force. The Egyptian regime would have faced two choices: One, not responding and immediately, thus losing the little acceptance it still has among Egyptians. Two, responding and going to war with Israel would mean the end of the proxy regime. Simply put, allowing the population of Gaza into Egypt would mark the end of the Egyptian surrogate regime.

Many have claimed that Egypt is also rejecting Trump’s plan to avoid being viewed as complicit in ethnic cleansing. In truth, Egypt has already been complicit for the past 16 months, standing by as Gazans were massacred without taking action to protect them. Their current position only reinforces this complicity. The deaths and injuries of hundreds of thousands were not enough to prompt a stand. The real red line was marked when Israel’s actions posed a threat to Egypt’s sovereignty and the survival of its regime.

Jordan, as a neighboring country, has a complex relationship with Palestine and Gaza. Jordan is concerned about potential security threats from Gaza, given the ongoing conflict with Israel. Jordan also has qualms about the potential impact of Gazan refugees in terms of the country's stability and domestic politics. Jordan is already hosting a large number of refugees from Syria and other countries, which puts a significant strain on its resources. Jordan's economy is facing significant challenges, including high unemployment and debt, which might make it difficult to absorb more refugees.

To add to the complexities, Jordan has a peace treaty with Israel, and accepting Gazan refugees might be seen as complicating that relationship. Jordan's decision to accept Palestinian refugees would also be influenced by regional dynamics, including its relationships with other Arab states and the international community. Given that Gazans confront a severe humanitarian crisis, including a blockade, poverty, and lack of access to basic services, Jordan would inherit the responsibility to be the provider of humanitarian assistance to Gazans.

While Trump and Israel, as well the Real Estate syndicates elsewhere in the world, notably in the USA, had their lips smacking at the thought of a sea-front villa on free land, Trump had to back-track swiftly seeing the repercussions and consequences were potentially disastrous.

Trump still had to save face. He got the world to make-believe that his chic mode to the reconstruction of Gaza, which the US would own, was workable. No. It simply was not. The ‘Riviera’ construct was going to be ethnic cleansing with a fancy name and just another war crime. Trump shifted from his political idiom to virtual silence on the initiative, and shut down all banter within his US administration. In fake pride, he adamantly declared that his plan “was excellent”. He conceded he would “not impose it but only recommend it”.

Clearly, Hamas had won the war on another front. And, their only weapon was sheer defiance and resilience. It reminds this writer of what Mahatma Gandhi once said about the struggle for India’s independence: “First, they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” Gaza could claim ‘Zafer’ (Arabic for victory)

The Arab League in atypical tone rejected U.S. President Donald Trump’s Gaza relocation plan, terming it unacceptable. Arab League secretary-general Ahmed Aboul Gheit said today their focus is on Gaza and tomorrow it will shift to the West Bank. Gheit said the Arab world has opposed this idea for 100 years and they are not about to cede now.

Now, with a ceasefire in place, Trump and Netanyahu are seeking to upset the applecart with a string of pretexts. Even those are going nowhere. They have are shedding crocodile tears about the condition of Israeli hostages. Trump did not want the exchange in drips and drabs; rather he wanted a quick and total transfer of hostages. Washington does not understand the Palestinian spirit of “Summud” (steadfastness). The cultural divisions and worldview are like cheese and chalk.

Every Israeli hostage has, upon release, extolled the quality medical care, ability to receive family visits, obtain adequate diets for the sick, and medical attention. Israeli hostages were unequivocal in their praise for the religious and humane values of Hamas hostage takers. One of them declared that “if there were another war involving Gaza and Israel, he would probably join Hams as a mujahidin for Hamas”.

In another telling example, Avera Mengistu, an Israeli civilian, who was detained by Hamas in 2014, was allowed to receive specialized medical treatment for his mental health condition. When Avera was released as part of the prisoner exchange, he narrated his optimistic images of Hamas.

Avera's story is one among many and underscores the importance of humanitarian treatment to prisoners, regardless of their background or circumstances. Palestinian hostage takers have demonstrated that, even in the midst of conflict, humanity and compassion can exhibit ‘loving resistance’, which implies that the supposed enemy is part of a common humanity who always has the obligation and right to genuine compassion.

In stark contrast, Palestinian prisoners have been subjected to cruelties while in Israeli detention. Reports from Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the Palestinian prisoner rights group Addameer have documented widespread torture and ill-treatment of Palestinian prisoners. Palestinian prisoners have being subjected to various forms of torture; including physical beatings, sleep deprivation, and psychological abuse. These practices cause long-lasting physical and psychological trauma for prisoners and their families.

There is also the question of International Law and Accountability. Torture is strictly prohibited under international law, including the Geneva Conventions and the Convention Against Torture. It is essential to hold perpetrators accountable for torture and ill-treatment, ensuring justice and reparations for victims and their families.

The systematic torture and ill-treatment of Palestinian prisoners are grave human rights abuses.

When one holds conversations with Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, they are deeply concerned that the Israel Army can be ruthless and will use their superior armory to kill and maim in the West Bank while Gaza gets less attention. Jenin and other cities have been brutally attacked. Even there, the Palestinian remains bold and resistance-prone. Of course, they fear for their children and youth. So the Israeli Occupying forces (IOF) are now using two fronts – both tacitly – and outside the radar of international attention. But they have been called out.

AA, Turkey reports that there have been over 350 violations of the January 15 ceasefire agreement by Israel. Ismail al-Thawabteh, chief of government media, has said: "The Israeli occupation has violated the ceasefire agreement more than 350 times since it was signed, clearly demonstrating its continued breach of commitments and its defiance of the international community." Since the ceasefire was signed on Jan. 15, the Israeli army has killed and injured dozens of Palestinians through airstrikes, including those carried out by fighter jets and drones, as well as direct shootings or drone strikes. Further violations include Israeli incursions into border areas east of the Gaza Strip.

Hamas reported multiple Israeli breaches of the ceasefire, such as delaying the return of displaced individuals to northern Gaza, targeting Palestinians with airstrikes and gunfire, obstructing the entry of shelter supplies, and delaying the arrival of medical necessities. Since the start of the ceasefire agreement, Israel has killed 92 Palestinians and injured 822 others in direct attacks.

United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres affirms: “Any refusal to accept the two-State solution by any party must be firmly rejected.” The denial of the right to Statehood would indefinitely prolong the conflict, and a one-State solution — huge Palestinian populations inside that State without any real sense of freedom, rights and dignity — would be inconceivable. Riyad Al-Maliki, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Expatriates of the State of Palestine, said that Israeli leaders “do not see our people as an empirical and political reality to coexist with, but as a demographic threat to get rid of through death, displacement or subjugation”.

There are only two paths ahead, he stressed — one that starts with Palestinian freedom and leads to shared peace and security in the region, or one that continues denying this freedom and dooms the region to endless conflict. “Israel should no longer entertain the illusion that there is somehow a third path whereby it can choose continued occupation and colonialism and apartheid and somehow still achieve regional peace and security,” he emphasized.