No stranger to putting his foot in his mouth, U.S. President Donald Trump’s latest remarks on Gaza have proven too tough for even his staunchest supporters to defend.
In a press conference alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump indicated the U.S. could “take over” the Gaza Strip, assuming responsibility for its reconstruction. When asked about the area’s Palestinian residents, he said they could be “relocated” to neighboring states like Egypt and Jordan, adding he “hoped” they would never feel any need to return.
The reckless and imperialistic notion saw swift backlash. Impartial observers warned it threatens to destabilize the Middle East and tarnish America’s global standing. Not only does the “plan” disregard the rights and aspirations of the Palestinian people, it also risks igniting a new conflict in a region already fraught with tension.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas rejected the idea outright, asserting that Gaza is an integral part of Palestine. Regional powers, including Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt, have also voiced strong opposition. United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres warned against any actions that could amount to ethnic cleansing.
The foolishness of the proposal is starker as it coincides with an ongoing ceasefire between Hamas and Israel that has allowed Palestinians to return to their homes in Gaza after more than a year of violence. Announcing plans to remove them forcibly once more evokes historical and widely derided colonialist policies, risking renewed resistance from both the Palestinian population and neighboring countries and non-state actors. This could lead to a broader conflict, undermining years of diplomatic efforts.
The proposal also does irreparable damage to the United States’ global reputation, portraying it as a nation willing to impose its will unilaterally, disregarding international norms and the sovereignty of other peoples. It justifies adversaries who have long decried the U.S. as a neo-colonial power that commits to respect for sovereignty, human rights, and the rule of law only so far as it can draw some benefit.
Recognizing the diplomatic faux pas, the White House has sought to retract Trump’s remarks, maintaining the proposal does not call for any boots on the ground or permanent relocations. The sudden “U-turn” is a welcome development–though one that should have never been required.
If the U.S. is truly committed to peace in the Middle East, it must engage in diplomatic efforts respecting the rights and aspirations of all parties involved. Trump’s proposal threatens not just another Middle Eastern conflict but also the very foundation of America’s credibility as a global leader.
A nation that disregards its own professed values cannot expect to lead the world. The American people—and the world—must demand better.