Israel is on the very cusp of major historical change. The only question is whether its leaders will seize the moment or, tragically, let it slip away. The potential portal to a new tomorrow was created by Donald Trump’s audacious proposal for the removal of the population of Gaza as a precondition for peace—or at least stability—in the war-torn coastal enclave. Jettisoning “false axioms” The essence of the revolutionary innovation in the Trump doctrine was that it set aside the “false axiom” that has underlain all previous policy proposals since the 1990s and Israel’s ill-considered unilateral withdrawal from Gaza—i.e., that for some yet-to-be-specified reason, Gaza must be administered by a Palestinian Arab self-governing entity of one form or another. Indeed, all policy proposals that eschew the notion of population removal envisage some yet-to-be-located “domesticated” Palestinian Arab, with both the will and the authority to live in peace—or at least long-term non-belligerence—with the Jewish state. As such, all these other proposals are, in some way, no more than some variant of the failed Oslo formula…or one of its ill-conceived derivatives. Indeed, perhaps one of the most puzzling aspects of these fatally flawed “Oslowian” concoctions was not only the widespread support they enjoyed in “learned” academic circles, but the fact that, despite its glaring and gory failures, its dominance of the debate endured as long as it did. After all, it had no real theoretical basis on which to draw or any empirical evidence with which to support its misguided prognoses. As such, they were little more than the triumph of unfounded optimism and /or political bias over inconvenient facts and recalcitrant realities. Governing Gaza: An inescapable algorithm Accordingly, the Trump proposal comprises a point of singularity—reflecting a sharp break from past trends, and a somber recognition of the futility of past pursuit of some mythical Palestinian Arab “peace partner”—reflected in the recurring failures over the last three decades. It embodies an acknowledgement that the possible structure of governance in Gaza is encapsulated in a deductive—almost mathematical—algorithm: Israel can determine who governs Gaza and how it is governed if, and only if, it governs it itself. But Israel can only govern Gaza itself without incurring accusations of it governing over “another people” if, and only if, that “other people” (i.e., The Arab population of Gaza) are removed from the confines of the Gaza Strip. The Trump proposal also represents the unmasking of a fallacy that has dominated decades of discourse on Gaza—that the general public in Gaza is somehow the unwilling victim of its radical Islamist leadership. Indeed, as the unvarnished images of October 7th show, the Gazan population is not the victim of its terrorist rulers. Quite the opposite, it is the crucible in which that leadership was formed and the incubator from which it emerged. The Hamas and its barbaric brutality are not an external imposition on an unwilling populace, but rather a true reflection of its innermost soul and most profound desires. Neither impractical nor immoral Since Trump’s proposal for the removal of the Gazan population was raised, it has been assailed by Oslowian stalwarts as either impractical or immoral or both. Both claims are demonstratively defective. With regard to its morality , it is difficult to identify any moral benefit in sentencing Gazans to a life under a misogynistic, homophobic Islamist tyranny, which any Palestinian Arab entity is bound to become, rather than allowing them to attain a better, more prosperous life elsewhere in some third-party country, outside the “circle of violence” they have endured for decades. With regard to its practical feasibility , the entire Gazan population—around two million- represent an infinitesimal amount of people relative to the global migrant population of well over a quarter of a billion (281 million). Indeed, adding the entire Gazan population to the total global tally of migrants would result in a barely perceptible increase of less than 1%. Significantly, the total population of Gaza is just over 1.6% of that of Egypt’s (almost 118 million) and 2.2% of that of Turkey (almost 88 million). Overall, the population of Gaza is merely 1% of the combined population of Egypt and Turkey, thus its absorption into those two countries alone—both vocal sympathizers of Gaza—would be a virtually imperceptible burden. Adding additional Muslim host nations—such as the Gulf states and Saudi Arabia—would reduce this minor burden even further—especially if accompanied by international financial aid. An urgent imperative Accordingly, the concept broached by Donald Trump, of population removal in Gaza, is not some outlandish, beyond-the-pale proposition. Nor is a recipe for radical right-wing extremism. On the contrary. It is nothing but sound political science. Its immediate implementation is an urgent imperative. Martin Sherman spent seven years in operational capacities in the Israeli defense establishment. He is the founder of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), a member of the Habithonistim-Israel Defense & Security Forum (IDSF) research team, and a participant in the Israel Victory Project .
