The West in Turmoil
President Trump’s barrage of proposals and statements by senior US officials on peace in the Middle East and Ukraine have surprised European partners, triggering confusion and uncertainty. Last Friday, Vice-President Vance chastised European leaders for failing to listen to their voters. When asked about European participation in the negotiations with Russia, US Special Envoy for Ukraine and Russia Kellogg said, “I think that’s not gonna happen.” Mr. Trump’s latest salvo, lost among others, was a nuclear deal with Russia and China to halve defense budgets.
On January 25, President Trump proposed that Gazans should be moved to their new homes in Jordan and Egypt for good. The two countries rejected the idea. Nonetheless, he continued to double down. Last Monday, a day before he met with King Abdullah II of Jordan, he upped the ante by threatening the two countries by cutting US aid.
Egyptian and Jordanian governments rejected Mr. Trump’s proposal because that would mark the end of the Palestinian cause. Moreover, they are worried about the negative impact of such a huge population transfer on their domestic political and economic stability. This may force Mr. Trump to look for alternative destinations in the Arab world and beyond.
On September 10, 2024, UN Secretary-General Guterres transmitted to the General Assembly the report prepared by the secretariat of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) on “the economic costs of the Israeli occupation for the Palestinian people: the economic impact of the Israeli military operation in Gaza from October 2023 to May 2024”.
The following are from the “summary” of the report:
“Since the early 1990s, Israel, the occupying Power, has imposed restrictions on the movement of goods and people in and out of Gaza. The restrictions have been greatly intensified since the 2007 takeover by Hamas of the Gaza Strip. For 17 years, 2.3 million Palestinian people have been confined to a small, 365 km2 enclave with one of the highest population densities in the world. Entry of goods has been reduced to basic needs and humanitarian relief. In addition, Gaza has endured numerous extensive military operations in just over a decade and a half: in 2008–2009, 2012, 2014, 2021, 2022 and May 2023 and since October 2023. The restrictions, closures and recurrent military operations have resulted in the utter destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure and productive base. The hollowing out of the economy has cultivated a profound dependency on external aid.
“The war that followed the attacks by Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups on 7 October 2023 devastated the remnants of Gaza’s economy and infrastructure. The intense military operations in Gaza resulted in an unprecedented humanitarian, environmental and social catastrophe and propelled Gaza from de-development to utter ruin. The far-reaching repercussions will linger for years to come, and it may take decades to return Gaza to the status quo ante.” [i]
The report is an authoritative statement on the past of Gaza and the devastation caused since the October 7 Hamas assault. It is also a confirmation of the fact that a quick restoration of Gaza is mission impossible.
President Trump’s continuing remarks about “taking over Gaza” and “making it the Riviera of the Middle East” have triggered a broad international reaction. Many countries, including some of Washington’s NATO allies, rejected the idea, saying it went against the “two-state solution”. That has been a routine feature of their public discourse on the Arab-Israeli conflict.
During remarks to the press with Mr. Netanyahu, President Trump was asked, probably by an Israeli journalist, if he supported “Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria which many believe is the biblical homeland of the Jewish people”.
He said, “Well, we’re discussing that with many of your representatives. You’re represented very well, and people do like the idea, but we haven’t taken a position on it yet. But we will be – we’ll be making an announcement probably on that very specific topic over the next four weeks.” Does that mean that Mr. Trump wishes the Palestinians in the West Bank to join Gazans in their new homes somewhere? Possibly.
Considering the difficulties of molding the West Bank and Gaza into an independent state, given the deep enmity between Israelis and the Palestinians, the geographic complexities on the map, and more and more Israeli settlements in the West Bank, do the countries that advocate the two-state solution genuinely believe that this is still an option? Would European countries be prepared to push strongly for such a solution at the cost of a confrontation with Israel? Would the US allow that? Did Mr. Biden’s few references to the “two-state solution” represent a commitment? Would other major powers take the lead and do everything possible to bring the idea of the “two-state solution” to conclusion? Can the Middle East countries make a difference? I doubt it.
EU countries are more than prepared to live with the status quo. And Russia and China enjoy seeing Washington preoccupied with a constant Middle East headache.
Would Gazans be prepared to voluntarily leave their homeland for the promise of a better life elsewhere?
During an interview following the talks between President Trump and King Abdullah II, Secretary Rubio said, “If people don’t like the Trump plan for Gaza, right now it’s the only plan. And so I think it’s now incumbent upon the Arab countries – our allies; we work very closely with them – if they think they’ve got a better plan, we need to hear it.”
What if Washington were to come up with a more attractive alternative?
Looking at the link between a lack of hope and a desire to migrate, and the migratory trends in the Middle East, many Gazans might be prepared to go to Europe or the US. In remarks to the media with King Abdullah II, Mr. Trump himself said that the Gazans are “a very small number of people”. Since they have lived on the Mediterranean coast for ages, new homes on the “Gulf of America” might appeal to them. After all, they only need a tiny piece of land of 365 square kilometers. This would only cover 0.003 % of US territory. The rich countries of the Gulf would surely be more than willing to pay for their new homes. And, if President Trump is determined to win the Nobel Peace Prize, he may even call the new enclave “Palestine”, make it the 51st state, and deny Canada the privilege.
On a more serious note, according to UN Secretary-General Guterres, if put into practice, President Trump’s proposal to “take over Gaza” would be ethnic cleansing. In other words, it will be the obituary for the “two-state solution”. Is there any common ground among the parties, a path toward resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, toward the two-state solution? Unfortunately, there is nothing in sight.
A day after President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu met at the White House, Secretary of Defense Hegseth greeted the latter saying that the US has no greater ally than Israel and that under President Trump’s leadership and, just like Israel, the US is also totally committed to achieving “peace through strength”. After the NATO Defense Ministers meeting in Brussels, he said “There is no replacement for hard power.” Yesterday, in remarks to the media with Prime Minister Netanyahu, Secretary Rubio underlined Washington’s total commitment to Israel’s security and singled out Tehran as the source of the Middle East’s troubles.
Referring to recent speculation about Israel bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities Mr. Trump recently said, “There’s two ways to stopping them: with bombs or a written piece of paper. I would love to make a deal with them without bombing them.”
Indeed, Israel is Washington’s number one ally and Washington will support it always and all the way, with hard power. Israel, however, is an exceptional case. The Biden administration appeared strongly committed to standing behind Ukraine “as long as it takes”. Senior US officials constantly said, “Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine”. However, their priority was weakening Russia. Now, the Trump administration is playing a different tune, prioritizing dialogue with Moscow perhaps to single out Beijing for global competition. But during the last three years, Ukraine has suffered enormous loss of life and devastation. The change from one administration to the other would inevitably lead to questions regarding the steadiness of US foreign and security policy.
Today, as Secretary Rubio and other senior US officials meet their Russian counterparts in Saudi Arabia, President Macron will host a group of European leaders to review the latest US/EU/NATO developments. UK’s emerging role as a European country with the closest relationship with Washington would be interesting to watch.
The meeting in Paris will be the first step in looking for answers to two questions: Would Europe’s initial reaction to the latest developments be followed by action? Would Europeans support sending troops to Ukraine and a considerable increase in defense expenditures?
As for Türkiye, we have become inward-looking and decoupled from international developments due to our domestic tensions and economic downturn. Our involvement in regional peacemaking is a thing of the past. And, we are once again waiting for the call, but given an increasingly unpredictable White House, more anxious than four years ago.[ii]
[i] https://www.un.org/unispal/document/unctad-report-10sep24/
[ii] https://diplomaticopinion.com/2021/02/15/waiting-for-the-call/