Let’s not just dismiss Trump’s plan for Gaza

The initial reactions from the Middle East are not surprising. Egypt and Jordan rejected any notion of them hosting part of the Gazan population. Hamas and other Palestinian leaders rejected the idea of resettlement outright. Critics have flagged international law to reject the ideas. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, the Palestinian Authority and the Arab League declared that moving the Palestinians out of the Gaza Strip could “threaten the region’s stability, risk expanding the conflict, and undermine prospects for peace and coexistence among its peoples.”

Undoubtedly, President Trump’s radical ideas raise several issues. Will the movement of Palestinians out of the Gaza Strip be permanent, or only until the completion of the rebuilding process? Though the scale is different, the West Bank is also impoverished and requires international attention and aid. Even temporary movement of Gazans is problematic as countries like Jordan and Lebanon have been burdened with Palestinian refugees for decades. They do not have the economic or social capacity to absorb more Palestinians, even temporarily.

Two, the occupation of the Gaza Strip runs against Trump’s declared policy of not fighting others’ wars and limiting avoidable military engagements abroad. Despite the Iraqi misadventure, no American leader has even toyed with the idea of occupying the Gaza Strip.

Three, while several Arab states and societies have been supportive of the Palestinian cause since the 1940s, they have been equally apprehensive of the physical presence of the Palestinians in their midst. The Black September violence in Jordan in 1970, the prolonged civil war in Lebanon (1975-1989) and the Iraqi atrocities during the Kuwait crisis were partly attributed to the Palestinians in these countries. Arab countries, including Egypt and Jordan, have been reluctant to open their borders to Palestinians even during the Israel-Hamas conflict. Moreover, both these countries are already fighting Muslim Brotherhood factions internally, and they don’t want the residues of Hamas in their midst.

At the same time, it is foolish to dismiss Trump’s Gaza plan. For one, he never hesitates to tread on unpopular paths. He is undaunted by controversies. The entire international community recognises the need and urgency for the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip. And Trump merely put forth his agenda. Therefore, critics should now develop a credible and workable alternative plan.

Two, though crude and startling, some of Trump’s observations are accurate. After the 15-month conflict, the Gaza Strip is a “demolition site”, an expression the President used during Benjamin Netanyahu’s Washington visit. Palestinians and their supporters squarely blame the destruction on Israel, while the latter and its supporters hold Hamas and its allies responsible. Either way, Trump’s description of the Gaza Strip being “hell” and a “mess” is precise.

Three, since the end of World War II, American occupation has transformed several societies for good. The modernisation of Japan, Germany and South Korea happened primarily due to the heavy lifting — economic and political — done by the US. It must be noted, however, when it transformed these countries, the US had the economic capabilities and political will. This is not the case today. The economic strength and political willingness for an extended, costlier, and politically unpredictable presence in the Gaza Strip is largely questionable. Will his rich regional allies, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Qatar, fund Trump’s restructuring plans for the Middle East?

Four, with the sole exception of Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu, the entire world dismissed some of the policies of the previous Trump administration, including his peace plan, which Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas called the “slap of the century”. The UN General Assembly even adopted a resolution deriding President Trump for moving the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. However, weeks before leaving office, President Trump presided over the Abraham Accords, and this Israel-Arab normalisation has endured through the catastrophic Israel-Hamas War.

Five, it is unrealistic to expect all 1.8 million Gazans to leave the Strip for a third country. But even if a significant number is relocated temporarily, one can look for a more stable peace. While he needs them to pursue his Gaza agenda, some key countries also need President Trump. His first foreign visit is likely to be to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and normalisation of Saudi-Israel relations will be on top of his agenda. Some tactical moves, like American support for a demilitarised Palestinian state and symbolic concessions from Netanyahu, would enable Trump to gain allies for his Gaza agenda. Moreover, the ability of the internationally recognised PNA to govern the Gaza Strip rests largely on American support; indeed, since assuming office in November 2004, following the death of Yasser Arafat, President Abbas has never set foot in the Gaza Strip. Trump’s support is critical for the longevity of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi. The survival of the Hashemite regime in Jordan rests on the delicate balance between the domestic Palestinian population and the desire for closer ties with Washington. Hence, the public noise made by these leaders should not be taken at face value.

President Trump is not known for conservatism or diplomatic niceties. He never hesitates to abandon caution and signal dramatic U-turns in US policies. His startling and dramatic statements and announcements often lead the US into deeper controversies and quagmire. The Gaza Strip is the latest example. However, reservations aside, it’s time to ask President Trump for more details and an action plan. Who knows, the horse may fly.

The writer teaches contemporary Middle East at Jawaharlal Nehru University