Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jonathan Este, Senior International Affairs Editor, Associate Editor
Steve Bannon may no longer be in Donald Trump’s inner circle, but the newly reinstated US president appears to be adhering to a dictum the conservative disrupter-in-chief outlined back in 2018 as he reflected on his role in getting Trump elected the first time. “The Democrats don’t matter. The real opposition is the media. And the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with shit.”
It’s fair to say that for the first two weeks of Trump’s second presidency the Democrats haven’t really mattered. But Trump and his advisers have got news organisations struggling to work out which way to look.
In any normal news cycle, the appointment of vaccine-sceptic RFK Jnr. as health secretary would dominate the headlines, as would the successful installation of any of the more bizarre Trump cabinet picks. But at the same time the media has had to deal with a steady stream of other attention-grabbing announcements: the idea that the US could one way or the other acquire Greenland from Denmark, for instance, or the threats to use force to take control of the Panama Canal. We’ve had conflicting statements about how to end the war in Ukraine (more of which later) and the now you see them, now you don’t tariff threats against Mexico and Canada, not to mention the idea that the latter could be incorporated as the 51st state of the USA.
The zone has been well and truly flooded. Meanwhile, the administration’s plan to take complete control of the civil service (which appears to be straight out of the Project 2025 playbook) has proceeded apace with career public servants being dismissed in their droves to make way for true Maga (Make America Great Again) believers in key roles. This, needless to say, has struggled for attention in light of all the eye-catching news stories.
Sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter from The Conversation UK. Every Thursday we’ll bring you expert analysis of the big stories in international relations.
This week’s big idea has to do with his vision for a post-conflict Gaza. Trump foreshadowed this plan last week when he announced he was talking with the leaders of Egypt and Jordan about resettling Gazans there – whether permanently or just for a period of reconstruction of Gaza was not clear, his statement was short on detail. But this week, hosting the Israeli prime minister in Washington (significantly the first foreign leader to visit since his inauguration), Trump expanded on his vision while Benjamin Netanyahu looked on approvingly.
Initially, it appeared that Trump’s plan was for the permanent relocation of all 2.2 million Gazans to other countries while the Trump administration and its allies considered the considerable real estate investment opportunities presented by turning the 360km² Gaza Strip, with its 40km Mediterranean coastline into the “Middle East Riviera”. But as Simon Mabon notes here, administration officials were later quick to insist that the relocation would only last for as long as it takes to rebuild the stricken enclave.
Mabon, professor of international relations at the University of Lancaster who specialises in Middle East politics, also notes that the proposal did what few other issues seem able to do: united the Arab nations in opposition. He also believes that while both Egypt and Jordan have signed peace deals with Israel, the relationship is often fractious and this latest announcement won’t have helped.
Most importantly, perhaps, will be the reaction of Saudi Arabia. Israel (with Washington’s encouragement) has been pursuing normalisation of relations with Riyadh for some years. But the Saudi ruler, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, has explicitly rejected “any attempts to displace the Palestinians from their land as well as affirming that relations with Israel would depend on the establishment of a Palestinian state.
Read more:
What Trump’s proposal to ‘take over’ Gaza could mean for Arab-Israeli relations
It’s not the first time, by any means, that the idea of clearing Gaza of Palestinians has been mooted. It’s not even the first time that the real estate investment potential of such a plan has been discussed by a senior Trump official. Back in March last year, Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and former senior adviser who was the architect of Trump’s 2020 peace plan, talked up the idea of resettling Gazans in the Negev desert while noting that “Gaza’s waterfront property could be very valuable”.
Israel’s far-right settler movement, meanwhile, has long yearned to empty out the strip. In December 2023 the leader of the Nachala Israeli settlement movement, Daniella Weiss, declared that Gaza City had always been “one of the cities of Israel. We’re just going back. There was a historical mistake and now we are fixing it.”
The relocation of Palestinians outside Palestine was actually part of the founding mission of UN agency Unrwa – which, incidentally was banned by Israel last week and has been defunded by the US since allegations surfaced last year that a number of Unrwa employees had taken part in the Hamas attacks on October 2023.
Anne Irfan of University College London, a specialist in refugees and displacement, and Jo Kelcey of the Lebanese American University, whose core research area covers the politics of education in marginalised communities such as Gaza, recount here that Unrwa was set up in 1949 following the Nakba (catastrophe) when more than 700,000 Palestinians were displaced in fighting before and after the foundation of the State of Israel.
Unrwa was set up with the aim of resettling the displaced people and sponsoring projects that would create jobs and promote economic development in their new host countries: the “works” in the agency’s title.
As Irfan and Kelcey note, the staunchest opponents of this plan were Palestinians themselves. They could read between the lines of this mission, that their exile was intended to be permanent. It was a non-starter and within five years of Unrwa’s establishment the resettlement policy was shelved in favour of a focus on education, which remains to this day.
Not that Trump would be keen to associate any plan of his with Unrwa. In 2018 he fully defunded the agency, the first time a US president has done this. He has also more recently extended Joe Biden’s suspension of Unrwa funding after the allegations of Hamas infiltration and has made it clear he supports Netanyahu’s ban on the agency operating in Israel.
Read more:
Trump plans to ‘permanently resettle’ Palestinians outside Gaza – the very reason Unrwa was originally created
Meanwhile, how would the Gaza plan sit in terms of Trump’s “America First” strategy? Mark Shanahan, of the University of Surrey, believes this is all part of what he refers to here as “Trumperialism”. It’s not so much America as the light on the hill, trying to find a way to fix global problems and seek peaceful solutions to dangerous and distressing conflicts. Rather, in this case at least, it sees Gaza as “an opportunity for American business to build wealth – the classic US economic hegemony of the populist America First political theory”.
Rather than emulating the Marshall plan of what feels now like a more enlightened era, Trump’s plan for Gaza, at least as he laid it out after his meeting with Netanyahu, is more akin to the plan for the rebuilding of Iraq after the 2003 invasion, writes Shanahan. That is: US private funding for beachside condos and luxury developments while the countries to whom the displaced Palestinians are relocated would be expected to pay for the privilege.
But Trump also hinted this might mean US boots on the ground in the Middle East, cautions Shanahan, adding that “delivering Mar-a-Lago on the Med may mean thousands of American combat troops deployed to Gaza for years at daily risk of death. How do main-street Americans benefit from that?”
Read more:
How Trump’s Gaza plan does – and doesn’t – fit in with his pledge to put America first
And if you wondered whether – like so many of Trump’s big plans and executive orders issued since his second inauguration – the Gaza Riviera scheme might fall foul of the law, it would. As Tamer Morris –
an expert in international law at the University of Sydney – explains, the US would require the consent of the Palestinian people to take control of Gaza. And this is not going to happen.
Forced relocation is forbidden under the Geneva Conventions as is helping another state forcibly relocate people. It could also be interpreted as ethnic cleansing, as defined by the Commission of Experts report on the former state of Yugoslavia to the UN Security Council in 1994.
Read more:
Trump wants the US to ‘take over’ Gaza and relocate the people. Is this legal?
Meanwhile in Ukraine
Meanwhile, the US president has also been making noises about his ideas for bringing peace to Ukraine. The latest, aired this week, involved linking continuing US support with favourable concessions on Ukraine’s supply of rare earths and other strategic resources. Stefan Wolff, of the University of Birmingham, has been watching the diplomatic manoeuvrings around Trump, Putin, Xi and Ukraine since the war began nearly three years ago. In the past fortnight, he’s been looking at the prospect of a peace deal brokered by the US.
Wolff thinks it unlikely that anything will be resolved in the foreseeable future beyond a ceasefire and freezing of the battle lines. And that’s not even much more than a distant possibility given that neither Kyiv nor the Kremlin seem to want this for reasons of their own.
Read more:
Trump’s vision of a peace deal for Ukraine is limited to a ceasefire – and it’s not even clear if Kyiv or Moscow are going to play ball
The possibility of Europe bearing the burden of maintaining support to Ukraine without the US bearing the lion’s share of the burden also looks remote. Domestic politics in many EU member states is threatening the bloc’s unity – and, in any case, the ability of Europe to make up the shortfall caused by a possible US withdrawal of aid to Ukraine is distinctly doubtful. And unlikely improve any time soon.
Read more:
Ukraine: prospects for peace are slim unless Europe grips the reality of Trump’s world
It appears, meanwhile, that Putin’s ally Kim Jong-un is poised to send another wave of North Koreans to help. Jennifer Mathers, of Aberystwyth University, takes a detailed look at what we know about how these troops have fared thus far. She concludes that, given the terribly heavy losses the North Korean units are reported to be suffering, it’s possible that their leader may be trading the high casualty rate for much-needed combat experience in case his army might want to fight in a conflict nearer to home.
Read more:
North Korea: Kim Jong-un is sending a second wave of soldiers to Ukraine – here’s why
World Affairs Briefing from The Conversation UK is available as a weekly email newsletter. Click here to get our updates directly in your inbox.
– ref. Trump’s Gaza and Ukraine plans come under the spotlight – https://theconversation.com/trumps-gaza-and-ukraine-plans-come-under-the-spotlight-249311