Getty Images
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Nethanyahu (left) and U.S President Donald Trump (right) address reporters during a joint press conference in the East Room of the White House On Feb. 4.
On Tuesday, President Trump called for the U.S to take long-term control of the Gaza territory. Such a statement was a break from decades of U.S foreign policy that failed to provide a firm stance on an independent Palestinian state. Similar to previous rhetoric during his first weeks in office, Trump remains focused on making decisions that he believes promote the U.S Government’s interests.
At a press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Nethanyahu, Trump proposed that “The U.S. will take over the Gaza Strip.” He argued that this would bring greater stability to the volatile situation in Gaza. Trump provided the rationale for his proposal that rebuilding needs U.S. support because the current government presiding over Gaza, the U.S Designated Terrorist Organization, Hamas, has no plans or desire to rebuild Gaza, leaving Gaza as a war-torn wasteland with a major humanitarian crisis, which Trump described the living conditions as “living in hell.” Trump said that he wants to see “really good quality housing” built outside of Gaza for Palestinians, likely in partnership with the other Middle Eastern powers.
If Trump attempts to implement this proposal, it would directly involve and invest the U.S in Israel and the Middle East. This runs contrary to the lots of isolationist rhetoric heard from Trump during his campaign.
Trump did not comment during the press conference on the logistics behind gaining sovereignty of the Gaza Strip. He also did not acknowledge whether Israel would eventually have sovereignty in the region or if he has aspirations for Gaza to become a U.S Territory. According to senior Trump officials, the project to rebuild Gaza could take 10 to 15 years. At this time, there is no proposed or estimated budget nor any understanding on who would foot the bill.
Trump’s proposal also involves relocating Gazan residents. Trump said that he wants to see “really good quality housing” built outside of Gaza for Palestinians. This plan, however, will have difficulty coming to fruition as Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Qatar have already vehemently rejected taking in refugees from Gaza. Trump also declared that this plan would bring jobs and housing to Gaza.
Another strain in this strategy is that the Palestinian Authority and Hamas have also rejected this plan, refusing to give up sovereignty over Gaza. Netanyahu has proclaimed that his primary goal is to ensure Gaza is not the host of terrorists. He knows that despite all the destruction Israel has caused to Hamas and Gaza, terrorists still have control over the territory. Although Netanyahu probably did not foresee Trump’s unorthodox and outstretched idea, with the end goal of his war still not met, he said, “It [Trump’s plan] is something that could change history, and it is worthwhile really pursuing this avenue.”
At this moment it seems highly unlikely that Trump’s plan will come to fruition considering that for the U.S to directly acquire the territory, that would require an armed U.S intervention in Gaza which would completely shift Trump’s previous foreign policy of “peace through strength” on its head.
Many experts have been left dumbfounded by Trump’s proposal, however, now Trump is taking a clear stance that he does not believe in a two-state solution, differentiating himself from previous modern U.S presidents, including his first administration. What Trump plans to do with Gaza still remains murky and unclear, however, what is clear is that he does not envision the future of Gaza in the hands of Hamas or any other terrorist organization.