Skip to main content

Trump Gaza

By


Everything is fine until you get to line 9 of Donald Trump's 20-point Peace Plan where he is proclaimed head of the new governing body of Gaza with Tony Blair named as one of the board members.  What on earth compelled him to be chief other than a late bid for the Nobel Peace Prize, which he so desperately wants?  Even if he showed any interest in the administration of this "deradicalized terror-free zone" there isn't much he could do as he knows nothing of the situation. The plan was apparently written by Tony Blair and Jared Kushner.

The irony is that Hamas no longer has any control over Gaza.  Its remaining leaders are in hiding in other Arab countries and what you have left in the strip are some rebel factions that may or may not still have a relative handful of Israeli hostages.  Hamas had long ceased to have any real control over Gaza, operating pretty much as a militant faction.  Gaza has been in chaos for decades with the Palestinian Authority (PA) unable to give it any support due to the fact the West Bank and Gaza are physically separated.

The PA has been pushed to the sidelines in discussions even though it is the official voice of Palestine with a representation at the UN.  For the record, 157 countries recognize Palestine as a state, most recently several European countries including France and the UK.  Yet, it was only given observer status in 2012, and still not recognized by the United States.  Absolutely no mention of the PA in this big beautiful "peace plan."

At least the plan does detach Hamas from the fate of Palestinians.  That's the only thing positive about it.  Most Americans seem to think Hamas and Palestinians are one in the same.  Hamas broke away from the Palestinian Liberation Organization in 1987 when Yasser Arafat recognized Israel. This was the first step in trying to broker a long range peace agreement between Palestine and Israel, which Hamas refused to recognize.  They gathered their militant forces in Gaza and have been parked there ever since. Meanwhile, the newly formed Palestinian Authority entered into negotiations with Israel and the US with the hopes of creating an independent Palestine.

At the time, Israelis occupied very little of the West Bank. There was no wall and Palestinians moved relatively freely between the two "states." After all, many Palestinians worked in Israel.  The West Bank and Gaza had been occupied by Israel ever since the Arab War of 1967, but it was the West Bank that the PA chose to make its home with the capital in Ramallah. 

In 1949, The West Bank had been annexed by Jordan after Israel declared its independence in 1948.  Gaza became part of Egypt. Both were uneasy relationships as Palestinians wanted their own homeland, but there was so much antagonism on all sides that eventually it blew up into a war in 1967 that saw Israel claim these two territories as its own. 

This was part of a maximalist plan to claim all of the Levant by Zionist Jews as the Kingdom of David.  Young Bibi Netanyahu took part in the so-called "war of attrition" that occurred between 1967-70. The IDF wanted to kidnap Arafat, which they almost did, and cut off the figurative "head" of the PLO. Bibi rose up the ranks to become a military leader and ultimately top political figure in Likud that had long supported this maximalist plan.  You have to hand it to them for defying the UN for nearly 60 years in refusing to give any ground to the Palestinians.

There was some hope at the tail end of the 90s when Bill Clinton tried to broker a last-minute deal that would give Palestine nominal statehood, the West Bank anyway.  The Wye River Memorandum with Netanyahu had dissolved and Clinton saw an opportunity with Labour leader Ehud Barak, who had briefly wrestled away control of the Knesset from Likud. But that too went up in smoke as Palestine would have been an independent country in name only.  Israel would still be able to exercise much control over the West Bank, which Arafat refused to accept.  As a result, he was blamed for the failure.

I suppose in retrospect it would have been better for Palestinian leaders to accept the agreement given what has happened since.  A veritable "trail of tears" that has seen massive Jewish settlements along the edges of the West Bank and the gradual impoverishment of Gaza to the point it was already one of the poorest places to live in the world before war broke out in October, 2023.

You could argue that it was a war of its own making when Hamas raided Israel and brutally murdered over 1000 civilians at a music festival and kidnapped another 240 persons and tried to strong-arm the struggling Netanyahu government into concessions.  It got none.  In fact, the horribly callous act gave Netanyahu the leverage he needed to launch a full scale invasion of Gaza. Maybe this is what Hamas wanted - a Holy War - but it came at the expense of Palestinians with more than 64,000 killed since October 7.  Nothing justifies that kind of slaughter, especially given most of the victims were women and children with no affiliation to Hamas.

Despite the internal turmoil in Israel, Netanyahu hangs onto power thanks largely to this war.  He has no real desire to sue for peace, having already pulled back on some of his concessions regarding this new "peace deal," which he edited while in Washington.  For him, it is just a pause in the ongoing Zionist campaign to claim all of the Levant.  Sound familiar?

If there is one thing Netanyahu and Putin have learned it is how to stall peace negotiations so as to regroup their forces for another assault.  It is doubtful Netanyahu has any plans to give Gaza back to the Palestinians.  If he can negotiate some sort of deal where Trump takes stewardship of Gaza before handing the territory over to him then so be it.  The most important thing is to kick Palestinians out.  The IDF currently controls about 80% of the territory.  It's not like Gaza will ever be joined to the West Bank.  At best it might operate as some sort of "free city," but that's not likely under these circumstances.

The weirdest thing about this peace deal is seeing Tony Blair a part of it. After being excommunicated from the British Labour Party for his support of the Iraq War, he joined forces with Larry Ellison, a Trump backer, to form the Tony Blair Institute, which earned him a seat on this mythical "Board of Peace."  Given Blair also sits on the board of JP Morgan, one figures there are development opportunities to be had in Gaza.  So, here we are with a peace plan that benefits no one other than an elite group of investors anxious to take advantage of this coastal property.  Trump has long hinted he wants to make a new "riviera" out of the Gaza Strip.  Here's a promo he shared back in February on Truth Social.





Comments

  1. James FergusonOctober 4, 2025 at 9:34 AM

    I see Hamas has tested his Peace Plan by agreeing to release the hostages. What will Netanyahu do?

    https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cdxq7zp7002o

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Team of Rivals Reading Group

By
''Team of Rivals" is also an America ''coming-of-age" saga. Lincoln, Seward, Chase et al. are sketched as being part of a ''restless generation," born when Founding Fathers occupied the White House and the Louisiana Purchase netted nearly 530 million new acres to be explored. The Western Expansion motto of this burgeoning generation, in fact, was cleverly captured in two lines of Stephen Vincent Benet's verse: ''The stream uncrossed, the promise still untried / The metal sleeping in the mountainside." None of the protagonists in ''Team of Rivals" hailed from the Deep South or Great Plains. _______________________________ From a review by Douglas Brinkley, 2005
293 comments
Read more

The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire

By
  Welcome to this month's reading group selection.  David Von Drehle mentions The Melting Pot , a play by Israel Zangwill, that premiered on Broadway in 1908.  At that time theater was accessible to a broad section of the public, not the exclusive domain it has become over the decades.  Zangwill carried a hopeful message that America was a place where old hatreds and prejudices were pointless, and that in this new country immigrants would find a more open society.  I suppose the reference was more an ironic one for Von Drehle, as he notes the racial and ethnic hatreds were on display everywhere, and at best Zangwill's play helped persons forget for a moment how deep these divides ran.  Nevertheless, "the melting pot" made its way into the American lexicon, even if New York could best be describing as a boiling cauldron in the early twentieth century. Triangle: The Fire That Changed America takes a broad view of events that led up the notorious fire, not...
230 comments
Read more

The Age of Roosevelt: The Crisis of the Old Order

By
A quarter of a century, however, is time enough to dispel some of the myths that have accumulated around the crisis of the early Thirties and the emergence of the New Deal. There is, for example, the myth that world conditions rather than domestic errors and extravagances were entirely responsible for the depression. There is the myth that the depression was already over, as a consequence of the ministrations of the Hoover Administration, and that it was the loss of confidence resulting from the election of Roosevelt that gave it new life. There is the myth that the roots of what was good in the New Deal were in the Hoover Administration - that Hoover had actually inaugurated the era of government responsibility for the health of the economy and the society. There is the contrasting myth (for myths do not require inner consistency) that the New Deal was alien in origins and in philosophy; that - as Mr. Hoover put it - its philosophy was "the same philosophy of government which...
170 comments
Read more