3 hours ago
5
ARTICLE AD BOX
Israeli diplomacy should take advantage of Trump's plan and its underlying assumptions to undermine entrenched views around the world regarding the nature of the conflict in our region.
By EFRAIM INBAR, YOSSI KUPERWASSER FEBRUARY 12, 2025 03:06
PEOPLE WALK amid the rubble of destroyed buildings in Jabalya, in the northern Gaza Strip, last month. Much of the Gaza Strip has been reduced to ruins; the American plan provides a response, the writers argue.
(photo credit: Dawoud Abu Alkas/Reuters)
President Donald Trump’s proposal to relocate Gaza’s Palestinian population to ensure a safer and better life and transform the Gaza Strip into a “truly wonderful area,” has captivated the imagination of many Israelis.
However, this suggestion is being met with fierce opposition by Arab countries and the Palestinian leadership.
The plan points to the price that the Palestinians will have to pay for their decision to carry out the terrible terror attack of October 7. Israel paid for its unreadiness with many lives and the freeing of a large number of terrorists as part of the hostage release agreement. The Palestinians paid with the decapitation of much of their leadership and the death of many of their people. Much of Gaza has been reduced to ruins.
It is evident that under the current leadership, the reconstruction of the area will not be possible. Moreover, the American plan provides a response, albeit partial, to the refugee issue –a central component of the Palestinian national ideology.
Trump’s proposal is so out-of-the-box that its implementation would require fundamental paradigm shifts among the parties involved. It is difficult to see such shifts occurring soon, despite President Trump’s claims that some of these changes are already underway and that economic pressure will ultimately bring about the rest.
To enable the realization of the US president’s proposal, three conditions must be fulfilled:
First, Hamas will have to be removed from power in Gaza and replaced with an entity willing to facilitate the implementation of the Trump initiative. At least in the first stage, this would mean Israeli military control of the territory.
Second, assuming that there is no intention of forcibly evacuating the Palestinian population, nearly all Gazans would need to be convinced to relinquish their grip on the land (bearing in mind that sumud, or “steadfastness,” is one of the core principles of the Palestinian ethos) and go into “exile” to improve their quality of life. Nevertheless, based on surveys, it appears that a significant number of Gazans would be willing to emigrate.
Third, Arab nations and other countries would need to cooperate in absorbing Gazans and funding the project. At present, such a move runs counter to their interests and could expose pro-Western Arab leaders, especially in Jordan and Egypt, to severe internal criticism.
IN THE coming weeks, Trump is set to launch an effort to bring about these changes in meetings with the leaders of Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. The initiative is part of his attempt to shape a broader regional architecture centered on neutralizing the Iranian nuclear threat and expanding the Abraham Accords through the normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Stay updated with the latest news!
Subscribe to The Jerusalem Post Newsletter
Trump is enlisting Western entrepreneurial logic for this effort, but it is doubtful that this will be enough to convince the people of the region to abandon their fundamental concepts.
Nevertheless, the Trump proposal is important, both in content and form. For the first time, it puts on the table a seemingly practical action plan that challenges conventional wisdom – thinking that has long obstructed progress and ensured the continuation of terror from Gaza. The proposal makes it clear that after October 7, the approach to the Palestinian issue must change fundamentally.
THE PROPOSAL has not come from Israel, local politicians, or think tanks. It comes from the US president at the very beginning of his term. Moreover, it acknowledges for the first time that the “two-state solution” is not the only possible solution to the conflict, contrary to even the original Trump plan (presented toward the end of his first term in office).
Palestinians must pay the price
Without saying so explicitly, it includes the message that the Palestinians, as the aggressors, must pay the price for the war they initiated and lost.
Taken in the context of Israeli and US measures against the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), the proposal signals that the rules of the game have changed – to the detriment of the Palestinians in a way that weakens the logic of their struggle and narrative against Zionism.
Even if Trump ultimately fails to secure the conditions for implementation of the plan, the very fact that it has been put on the table will force the Palestinians and Arab countries to propose practical alternatives to deal with the difficult reality in Gaza, and to do so in a way that is acceptable to both Israel and the US.
Additionally, it highlights once again how Europe and the rest of the international community are irrelevant to the resolution of the conflict.
The Palestinian counter-reaction may also manifest in increased motivation to carry out attacks from Judea and Samaria, and perhaps also as intensified activity against Israelis abroad. This is because the Palestinians see the implementation of the hostage agreement as a victory for terrorism, and this inspires further escalation.
Moreover, the agreement also releases terrorists into the territories of Judea and Samaria and Gaza – as well as abroad – including terrorists who will seek to orchestrate new attacks. In light of this, Israel must continue – and step up – its counterterrorism efforts, particularly in Judea and Samaria, while also preparing for a renewed flare-up of the campaign in Gaza.
SO FAR, Israel is not required to officially address the plan as its details have yet to be presented. Beyond expressions of appreciation and understandable satisfaction, Israel should refrain from leading public moves to promote the plan.
This is because its appeal and the chances of its success stem from the fact that it is an American initiative, not an Israeli one. Israel’s active promotion of the plan might interfere with the implementation of the hostage deal and increase tensions with the pragmatic Arab states, particularly Egypt and Jordan, who view the issues raised by the plan as being of almost existential importance.
The appropriate policy is to wish Trump success in his efforts to convince key Arab countries to assist in implementing the plan while noting the obstacles that exist, which are not Israel’s doing. In any event, Trump’s plan is perceived as an expression of a pro-Israel American policy; the image of the US standing firmly by Israel’s side enhances its deterrence and its international standing.
In any case, Israel should show support for President Trump’s more detailed plan, which he has promised to present within a month. Given the pro-Israel winds blowing in Washington and Trump’s character, official Israel should not publicly object to proposals put forward by the US.
As noted above, the Trump plan is predicated on removing Hamas from the equation – an outcome that is unlikely without IDF action or at least the threat of an IDF operation. The Americans, who are not enthusiastic about sending soldiers to Gaza, understand this and appreciate Israel’s contribution to the possibility of implementing their plan. The moderate Arab states would also like to see Hamas removed from Gaza, a fact that provides Washington with additional leverage over them.
Israeli diplomacy should take advantage of the Trump plan and its underlying assumptions to undermine entrenched views in many capitals around the world regarding the nature of the conflict in our region and how to manage it.
At the same time, Israel must prevent the implementation of the PA’s idea to relocate Gazans to the area west of Jericho. The proximity to Jerusalem and the strategic road to the Jordan Valley, Israel’s eastern security buffer. Moreover, increasing the Arab population of Judea and Samaria would add further demographic pressure on the State of Israel – an undesirable outcome.
All said, even if the Trump plan is not realized, its very introduction is beneficial for Israel.
Prof. Efraim Inbar is the former head of the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security. Brig.-Gen. (res.) Yossi Kuperwasser is the new head of the institute. He is a former head of the Research Division in the IDF Intelligence Corps.
English (US) ·