Palestinians must be given the chance to rebuild Gaza
https://arab.news/9446j
Does US President Donald Trump have a point? To an extent, maybe. Gaza is a 'hellhole.' In fact, it has been a hellhole for years as a result of previous Israeli bombardments. Rebuilding Gaza will be some challenge. The UN estimates there is about 50 million tonnes of rubble, intermingled with an array of unexploded ordnance. Technically, it would be easier to empty Gaza temporarily.
The trouble is that this was not what Trump was suggesting. Trump wants a Palestinian-free Gaza to indulge his real estate dreams. He made it clear Palestinians would not be allowed to return — a violation of international law constituting the forced displacement of a civilian population. This plan exhibits no understanding of the historical Palestinian experience, whereby 70 percent of the Palestinian population became refugees between 1947 and 1949, hundreds of thousands were displaced again in 1967 and, during the last 16 months, 90 percent of the population of Gaza was again forcibly displaced. This was no great humanitarian proposal, as the White House tried to make out.
Palestinians have long demonstrated a determination not to be forcibly displaced yet again. It is their right to stay on the land. They show no signs of leaving it.
Anti-Palestinian groups argue that Palestinians in Gaza could leave voluntarily. There can be nothing voluntary about leaving in a situation where they have already been bombed and starved into near-oblivion.
This dream was not an off-the-cuff moment. Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner made similar comments about cleaning up Gaza last year. Trump was shown ambitious plans for the Gaza riviera development that were devised by an economics professor at George Washington University, Joseph Pelzman.
Why can Palestinians not dream of their riviera on the Mediterranean in Gaza? Is this so outlandish?
Just as most of the world argued that any solution for the Syrian Arab Republic must be Syrian-led, any solution for Palestine has to be Palestinian-led. Gaza is for Palestinians and all designs on the future of the Strip must be devised by them, for them and with them. Pelzman's paper was decidedly not this and it reads as if it had been drafted by a committee of Israeli settler pogromists. It states that the administration of Gaza would be 'subcontracted to the selected investors and/or their representatives.' The education curriculum would be based on those from other states.
Gaza is for Palestinians and all designs on the future of the Strip must be devised by them, for them and with them
Chris Doyle
Arab states are hurriedly devising their own plans. This includes the state of Palestine. This is vital given the need to demonstrate that there is a workable alternative — and there certainly is — to the suggestions emanating from the White House.
The costs will be astronomic — the UN estimates about $50 billion. However, until a proper assessment is carried out, it is only educated guesswork.
No donor state will fund this, nor will private businesses invest unless there are cast-iron guarantees that Israel will not flatten Gaza again. Who would even dare to suggest that Israel pays compensation, let alone contribute to the reconstruction costs, as it should?
It should be understood that Gaza was not, as Trump described, a 'demolition site.' It has been bombarded into rubble as a deliberate Israeli strategy. Israel has a responsibility, though few suggest that Israel should offer temporary shelter to Palestinians with no homes.
Reconstruction requires the blockade to be lifted and the unimpeded entry of construction materials and equipment. The dual-use system Israel enforces has to be ditched, as it prevents the import of essential construction materials. The systematic Israeli destruction of the healthcare system means that hospitals need to be rebuilt. The Israeli-orchestrated scholasticide also saw the bombing of every single university site in Gaza, while 87 percent of schools have been damaged or destroyed. This means that the education system also needs to be rebuilt. The entire water, sanitation and power infrastructure has to be rebuilt. To encourage the return of proper economic life in Gaza, which has been throttled by decades of occupation and siege, it needs a port, an airport and safe passage to the West Bank, all of which were agreed to under the Oslo Accords.
The political system needs to be rebuilt too. It requires a Palestinian administration in Gaza that, first and foremost, has the support of Palestinians. It also has to attract the confidence of the international community. This is unlikely to be Hamas. So, who? A refreshed Palestinian political order is a medium- to long-term project for Palestinians, but a technocratic government would be a start.
Israel should not have a veto, nor should the US. If Israel wants security and not territory, then a thriving Gaza is definitely in its best interest.
Palestinians are capable of rebuilding Gaza themselves, if permitted, although genuine international assistance would be welcome. They have the skills, the motivation and the experience. But they cannot do this with the dead weight of the Israeli occupation blunting any endeavor.
• Chris Doyle is director of the Council for Arab-British Understanding in London. X: @Doylech
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Asharq Al-Awsat
31 minutes ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
China Carefully Assembling a Deep-sea Mining Strategy
In a world hungry for crucial resources, China may not be poised to start deep-sea mining but it is planting seeds for such operations in a meticulously planned economic and geopolitical strategy. The world's oceans, both international waters and those under national jurisdiction, are rich in minerals and metals, like cobalt, nickel and copper. These are important for building electric car batteries, for instance, and other technologies as countries try to transition away from fossil fuels. China "is an energy-thirsty country. It will look for resources everywhere," including the deep sea, said Julia Xue of Shanghai Jiao Tong University. But she said China is not particularly anxious over the issue, although recent developments -- one company is itching to be the first to start mining the sea bed -- may put more pressure on Beijing. A Canadian firm, The Metals Company, has filed an application with the United States to begin undersea mining in international waters. Using its American subsidiary, it acted after President Donald Trump, bypassing international negotiations, signed an executive order in April to speed up the permit-issuing process for such mining in US and international waters. Trump cited an obscure 1980 US law that says American citizens can explore for and recover deep sea minerals in areas beyond the country's jurisdiction. Environmental groups are outraged by Trump's order, arguing that a wild hunt for the potato-sized, metal-containing nodules could harm fragile undersea ecosystems. The Canadian company initially said it would submit its request to the International Seabed Authority (ISA), a body which has jurisdiction over the ocean floor in international waters. The Metals Company says it ignored this authority because of its slow pace in talks on adopting a mining code that establishes rules for exploiting seabed resources. The United States is not an ISA member. A long-time observer of those talks who spoke on condition of anonymity said China is not particularly worried about who starts mining first. "For them it's more about dominance, staying competitive in the game, and giving the impression that you can't mess with us," the observer said. With that goal in mind "they're definitely developing the technology and putting the strategic agreements in place," Alex Gilbert, a researcher at the Payne Institute for Public Policy at Colorado School of Mines, told AFP. For instance, China has reached an agreement with the Cook Islands to explore for minerals in that Pacific country's waters. Another tiny Pacific nation, Kiribati, also says it is exploring a deep-sea mining partnership with China. This approach is "more geopolitical than economic," said Emmanuel Hache of the French Institute for International and Strategic Affairs, noting Beijing is using undersea mining as a lure to cement greater diplomatic support as it exerts power. China holds five contracts handed out by the ISA to look for resources in the Pacific and Indian Ocean sea beds and these contracts cover all types of undersea mineral resources. China's is the largest number of the 22 contracts the organization has granted. Years behind "From a research perspective, we have been continuously getting closer. And from a technical perspective, we have been continuously improving," said Chen Xuguang, a researcher at Ocean University of China. In 2024 a Chinese prototype deep-sea mining vehicle called Pioneer II, developed by Shanghai Jiao Tong University, set a national record by operating at a depth of more than 4,000 meters (13,100 feet). State-owned Beijing Pioneer Hi-Tech Development Corporation told AFP that later this year it plans a seabed nodule collection test. Still, China is not as advanced technologically as The Metals Company, experts say. "I would characterize China as being two to four years behind them in terms of their technology," said Gilbert in Colorado. Hache, the French expert, put the gap at five years. But China has an advantage over firms like the Canadian one in recovering and processing nodules: its companies are supported by the state and China has infrastructure for processing metals. The observer of the international seabed talks said China does not need seabed mining for metal supply, "but maybe geopolitically, in the context of maintaining their control over the commodities market." China wants to keep its options open, this person said. And while it supports an international mining code, China does not need one now and "they're not going to put pressure until they've decided strategically that they're ready," said Gilbert.
Asharq Al-Awsat
an hour ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
Diplomats Dismiss to Asharq Al-Awsat Claims about UNIFIL Withdrawal from Lebanon
Western and United Nations diplomats dismissed as rumors claims that the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) was pulling out of the country. The Lebanese government is expected to request the extension of the peacekeeping forces' mandate that expires in August. A US State Department spokesperson told Asharq Al-Awsat that the reports about the withdrawal are 'inaccurate'. He did not elaborate further. UNIFIL has been deployed in southern Lebanon since March 1978. Some amendments to its mandate were introduced after the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982 and again after the July 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah. Debate rages every year over its duties as the deadline for renewing its mission approaches. Some countries have sought to grant the force more powers, which would put it at odds with Hezbollah that holds sway in the areas of its deployment. Hezbollah was severely weakened after last year's war with Israel and the ensuing ceasefire agreement had demanded that the Iran-backed party remove its weapons from the South. UNIFIL forces are deployed south of the Litani River and along the border with Israel. It boasts over 10,000 soldiers from some 50 countries, as well as 800 civilian employees. UNIFIL spokesperson Andrea Tenenti told Asharq Al-Awsat that the forces' greatest challenge is the lack of a long-term political solution between Lebanon and Israel. UNIFIL continues to encourage the parties to renew their commitment to fully implementing UN Security Council resolution 1701 and taking tangible steps to address pending issues related to it, including steps that would lead to a permanent ceasefire, he added. It is too soon to tell what UNIFIL's mandate will be like after next August, he went on to say, stressing that changing its mission is up to the Security Council. Israeli media had reported that the United States wanted to end UNIFIL's mission. Speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, a diplomat dismissed the report as 'usual fearmongering aimed at influencing Lebanon and other parties interested in extending UNIFIL's mandate and its role in preserving stability in the South and along the Blue Line between Lebanon and Israel.' The Security Council is currently awaiting Lebanon's request to extend the mandate for another year, said western diplomats. The letter will include Lebanon's clear demand for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from all occupied Lebanese territories, including the five hilltops it seized during last year's war. The ceasefire agreement demanded that Israel pull out from those areas within 60 days. Lebanon has been seeking to resolve this issue through the quintet committee tasked with monitoring the ceasefire and through intense contacts with the US. US officials are considering pulling American support from UNIFIL in a bid to cut costs associated with its operations, the Israel Hayom newspaper reported Sunday evening. US sources later confirmed to The Times of Israel that the option was on the table.
Asharq Al-Awsat
2 hours ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
Oil Up as Market Watches US-China Trade Talks
Oil prices climbed on Tuesday as investors awaited the outcome of US-China talks that could pave the way for easing trade tensions and improve fuel demand. Brent crude futures rose 28 cents, or 0.4%, to $67.32 a barrel by 0330 GMT. US West Texas Intermediate crude was up 23 cents, or 0.4%, at $65.52. On Monday, Brent had risen to $67.19, the highest since April 28, buoyed by the prospect of a US-China trade deal, Reuters said. US-China trade talks were set to continue for a second day in London as top officials aimed to ease tensions that have expanded from tariffs to rare earth curbs, risking global supply chain disruptions and slower growth. Prices have recovered as demand concerns have faded with the trade talks between Washington and Beijing and a favorable US jobs report, while there are risks to North American supply due to wildfires in Canada, Goldman Sachs analysts said. US President Donald Trump said on Monday that the talks with China were going well and he was "only getting good reports" from his team in London. A trade deal between the US and China could support the global economic outlook and boost demand for commodities including oil. Elsewhere, Iran said it would soon hand a counter-proposal for a nuclear deal to the US in response to a US offer that Tehran deems "unacceptable", while Trump made clear that the two sides remained at odds over whether the country would be allowed to continue enriching uranium on Iranian soil. Iran is the third-largest producer among members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and any easing of US sanctions on Iran would allow it to export more oil, weighing on global crude prices. OPEC+, which pumps about half of the world's oil and includes OPEC members and allies such as Russia, is accelerating its plan to unwind its most recent layer of output cuts. "The prospect of further hikes in OPEC supply continues to hang over the market," Daniel Hynes, senior commodity strategist at ANZ, said in a note. "A permanent shift to a market driven strategy (in OPEC) would push the oil market into a sizeable surplus in H2 2025 and almost surely lead to lower oil prices."
