Donald Trump’s controversial proposal for Gaza acts as a distraction from his real aims, namely a nuclear deal with Iran and increased Israeli control over the West Bank. While the Gaza plan is unrealistic, it shifts expectations in the region and sets the stage for significant shifts that could undermine Palestinian claims and lead to increased tension.
Donald Trump has publicly advocated for the United States to take control of Gaza, envisioning it as a Mediterranean paradise. This provocative proposal, however, serves as a distraction from his more feasible ambitions in the region, notably a nuclear deal with Iran. Trump appears to exploit the outrage his ideas provoke to shift perceptions regarding the rights of Palestinians, particularly in the West Bank.
A potential nuclear agreement with Iran seems to be one of Trump’s objectives. He openly expressed his desire for such a deal, which could grant Iran economic relief and a reprieve from sanctions. However, any agreement would likely provoke criticism from the Israeli establishment and their allies, compelling Trump to offer compensatory measures to assuage their concerns.
Trump has hinted at supporting an expansion of Israeli control over the West Bank as part of his strategy. He suggested that his administration might announce developments regarding this issue, which could hold serious implications for Palestinian territories. By suggesting fantastical ideas like the transformation of Gaza, Trump may be setting a precedent that undermines Palestinian claims to the land.
There appears to be a viable path for Trump to execute a nuclear deal with Iran, especially given the current state of Iran’s military capabilities post-sanctions. Trump’s previous sanctions on Iran have weakened the nation’s bargaining position significantly, making an agreement appealing to Tehran amidst military setbacks and losses in regional influence.
The necessary agreement might require Iran to halt nuclear advancements and allow international oversight of its facilities, potentially extending Iran’s timeline to develop nuclear weapons. Furthermore, Trump may advocate for limitations on Iran’s support for regional proxies, which have proven ineffective against Israeli operations.
Any resultant anger from the Israeli right over a nuclear agreement may be mitigated by Trump’s proposed annexation of more West Bank territory, suggested in the “Peace to Prosperity” framework. Although conditional on extensive compromise, such an annexation might be enough to appease Israeli hardliners after a nuclear deal is finalized, effectively reshaping the geopolitical landscape of the region.
While Palestinians could oppose a diminished state surrounded by expanded Israeli territories, the likelihood of U.S. and Israeli enforcement of such arrangements remains high, given the current control that Israel exerts over the area. The “Peace to Prosperity” plan may appear far-fetched, yet in the face of Trump’s more radical proposals, it might gain a reconsideration from Israeli extremists as a reasonable solution.
In summary, Trump’s outlandish proposal regarding Gaza serves as a distraction while he pursues practical objectives in the Middle East, particularly a nuclear agreement with Iran and an expansion of Israeli control over the West Bank. These ambitions could lead to dire consequences for Palestinians, reshaping the region significantly. The implications of such policies warrant close attention, as they may advance while overshadowing the rights and aspirations of the Palestinian people.
Original Source: www.theatlantic.com
