President Trump’s insolent proposal to move all Palestinians from Gaza and made him US territory sent shock waves around the world where Trump loyalists and members of the far right of Israel were welcomed; rejected by an American allies and opponents;; and criticized by experts as breach of international law.
Here is what we know about the idea of Mr. Trump for the mass relocation of the important obstacles to face.
Proposal
Mr. Trump hovered the idea that the Palestinians had left Gaza several times after joining the office of last month. His suggestion that they could be moved to Egypt and Jordan rejected last week According to these countries, along with a wide group of Arab nations.
On Tuesday evening, the President went even further. Speaking Together with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Israel in the White House, Mr. Trump said that the United States intends to seize control over gaza, Slide the Palestinian population and turn the destroyed coast encleave into the “Middle East Riviera”.
However, he did not say exactly how he planned it – to offer small details of logistics or extensive political maneuvering that would be necessary.
Regional complexity
The mass relocation of about two million Gaza populations is a politically explosive idea in the region with a long and bloody history of forced relocation.
While Mr. Trump framed this as a humanitarian imperative and an opportunity for economic development, he effectively re -opened the geopolitical box of Pandora with far -reaching consequences for the Middle East. For decades, control over Gaza has been one of the main points of the Arab-Israeli conflict of the Arab-Israeli conflict-a Palestinians and their allies would be Mr. Trump’s proposal for ethnic cleaning.
Many gazans are descendants of Palestinians who were pushed out of their homes during the wars surrounding Israeli founding in 1948, which is a displacement that became known around the Arab world as a Nakba or disaster. Now Mr. Trump suggests that they are re -displaced – insists on the Palestinians to welcome it because they “live in hell” in Gaza.
“I would think they would be thrilled,” he said.
However, the international Palestinian authority rejected President Trump’s proposal, as was Hamas, who ruled most of the last two decades and began Refreshment of inspection Since last month she joined the ceasefire agreement with Israel.
“Our people in Gaza do not allow these plans to go through,” Abu Zuhri, a higher Hamas official, said in a statement.
Costs
Mr. Trump compared his idea of displacement with New York real estate projects on which he built his career. “If we could find the right piece of land or a number of pieces of land and put them on some really nice places with a lot of money in this area, that’s certain,” he said. “I think it would be much better than returning to Gaza.”
Where this money would come from, but it remains to be seen. Mr. Trump suggested that other countries in the region could The financing of relocationBut he did not offer any details.
He also did not say who would finance and build the shining and modern “Riviera” he imagined. Mr. Trump has again suggested that another country-projekt, which recently said in the Middle East, would take 10 to 15 years-but also said that he predicted “long-term possession” without explaining what it means.
The Egyptian Foreign Ministry, the key American partner, said in its statement that the programs of assistance and recovery for Gaza must begin “without Palestinians outgoing”. And King Abdullah II of Jordan on Wednesday rejected any attempt to push the Palestinians and attach his country, according to the Jordanian royal court.
Legality
Mr. Trump has left a number of other basic questions of unanswered questions, such as how the American takeover of Gaza would be enacted and whether the use of force would be required. He admitted that US troops may be necessary.
But experts say that his proposal would undoubtedly violate international law.
The Geneva Conventions – which have been ratified by American and Israel – forbid the violent relocation of populations. Forced deportation or transfer of the civilian population is defined as a violation of international humanitarian law, war crime and crime against humanity.
For the United States, another serious violation would be permanently taking over the territory of Gaza, experts say. According to Marek Milanovich, a professor of international law at the University of Reading in England, the specifics of this violation would partly depend. The United Nations recognizes Palestine as a “permanent state of the observer” and 146 of 193 UN Member States recognize Palestinian statehood, but the United States does not.
A ban on one state that attaches all or part of the territory of another state is one of the most Important, basic principles international law. “There is a clear rule,” said Professor Milanovic. “You can’t conquer someone else’s territory.”
It is rare that states violate this rule. When yes, as in the case of Russian invasion of Ukraine, the reaction was widespread global convictions.
This could help explain why on Wednesday afternoon it seemed that Trump’s administration was trying to alleviate some of the more problematic presidential proposals.
Foreign Minister Marco Rubio spoke with reporters in Guatemala during a trip to Latin America and said that Mr. Trump only proposes to clean and rebuild Gaza – not to claim endless holding of the enclave.
“The only thing President Trump did – in my opinion very generously – is to offer the willingness of the United States to enter, clean the remnants, clean the place of all destruction,” said Mr. Rubio, so “then” people can go back. ”
It was an idea, Mr. Rubio added that “People must be serious about it.”
