|
Listen to article
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Plan
President Donald Trump has recently proposed that the US ‘own’ and ‘redevelop’ Gaza, suggesting the displacement of its 2.3 million residents to Egypt and Jordan. He stated that the US should assume control of the territory to ensure regional stability.“If we can get a beautiful area to resettle people, permanently, in nice homes, where they can be happy and not be shot and not be killed and not be knifed to death,” he remarked, suggesting that Palestinians in Gaza would be ‘better off’ if this plan is implemented. Trump also shared a controversial AI-generated video illustrating his vision for Gaza as the ‘Riviera of the Middle East,’ featuring luxurious beaches and skyscrapers.
Trump’s plan has received widespread condemnation. It is unworkable and would violate several tenets of international law if implemented. The US has no jurisdiction over the Gaza Strip, and Trump does not possess the legal or diplomatic powers to carry out his proposed plans. There are also many questions about the practicality and logistics of ‘rebuilding’ in the conflict-impacted zone.
Violation of International Legal Standards
Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO), stated that Trump’s proposal constitutes a “serious violation of international law. ” The forced displacement of Palestinians contravenes customary international law, which forbids such actions except in exceptionally rare cases. In an interview with Fox News, Trump explained that his proposal does not permit Gazans to return to their homeland. Additionally, Article 13(2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirms the right to return to one’s own country, complementing the wrongful nature of displacement. Furthermore, the specific right of Palestinian refugees to return is established in the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 194 of 1948.
The plan infringes upon the Palestinian right to self-determination, as stated in Article 55 of the UN Charter. Self-determination signifies a group’s ability to identify itself as a national entity. Article 55 indicates the UN’s commitment to fostering ‘conditions of stability and well-being required for peaceful and friendly relations among nations, grounded in respect for equal rights and the self-determination of peoples.” Additionally, in 1970, the UN General Assembly established, with a vote exceeding two-thirds majority, that the people of Palestine hold equal rights and the right to self-determination. Moreover, courts have referenced the principle of self-determination to uphold existing territorial frameworks.
In a 1996 case regarding Quebec’s secession, the Canadian Supreme Court held that ‘international law expects that the right to self-determination will be exercised by peoples within the framework of existing sovereign states and consistently with the maintenance of the territorial integrity of those states’. Trump’s plan would disrupt the region’s territorial integrity and undermine the recognised right to self-determination.
Lack of Consent of Neighbouring States
Trump stated, “I believe we will have a parcel of land in Jordan, a parcel of land in Egypt, we may have someplace else but I think when we finish our talks, we’ll have a place where they’ll live very happily.” Unsurprisingly, neighboring nations have voiced their opposition to this forced relocation. The governments of Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia have not agreed to the plan and have entirely dismissed it.
Egyptian officials have emphasized the importance of reconstructing Gaza without displacing Palestinians. In a similar vein, Saudi Arabia’s Foreign Ministry has stated its unwavering position against any form of relocation. Trump’s plan cannot be executed without securing agreement from the crucial stakeholders. It’s also critical to recognize that even if Trump’s proposal were feasible and implemented, it could result in global issues. This might trigger a domino effect, establishing a precedent for widespread illegal displacement. Developing countries, which already have limited influence in international law and politics, would face significant disadvantages. The global humanitarian issues stemming from the conflict should take precedence over industrial projects in the Gaza Strip.
The Palestinian Response
The Foreign Ministry declared: “The rights of our people and our land are not for sale, exchange, or bargaining.” Palestinians in Gaza have expressed strong disapproval of Trump’s proposals. The plan diminishes the autonomy and agency of those living in Gaza and overlooks their profound historical ties to the land. Forcing 2 million individuals to relocate against their will would be nearly impossible.
Conclusion
To summarize, US President Trump’s ‘plan’ to ‘redevelop’ is unworkable. It violates several international legal standards, specifically the right to return, rights against the unlawful displacement of civilians, and the right to self-determination. Facilitating such a plan may produce negative externalities, setting a precedent for mass unlawful displacement. The plan has not been consented to by essential stakeholders such as the people of Gaza and the governments of neighbouring countries. Relocating 2.3 million people against their will would be impossible and an infringement of the Palestinian people’s agency and rights.
Add comment