America’s Sinister Plan: How Washington Is Dividing Gaza
Mehr News Agency, International Desk: A recently published White House map outlines a future for Gaza that appears to involve an Israeli military withdrawal from parts of the enclave. However, it fundamentally ensures Israel’s long-term security control over gaza. This map is part of Trump’s “20-point plan” aimed at ending the war in Gaza. While marketed as a peaceful solution, closer analysis reveals it primarily seeks to cement Israel’s occupation and sovereignty in the territory.This report examines various aspects of this map, its implications for Gazan residents, and the political and humanitarian threats posed to Palestinians.
Gradual withdrawal: A Strategy to Cement Israeli Presence
The white House map divides Gaza into three color-coded stages symbolizing phases of Israeli troop “withdrawal.” According to al Jazeera’s report, currently only about 20 percent of Gaza is considered “non-occupied.” The plan envisions this percentage increasing sequentially-to 45 percent, then 63 percent-and eventually reaching 82 percent.
On the surface, this gradual move suggests an intention to reduce occupation. Yet closer scrutiny shows this is more a security calculation disguised as withdrawal than an actual exit. As each phase unfolds, much of Gaza remains effectively monitored-especially areas critical to Israel’s interests like Rafah city on the Egyptian border-which according to initial maps would remain under Israeli control during early phases. Thus, this so-called withdrawal appears more like symbolic concession rather than genuine restoration of pre-war conditions.
Security Buffer Zone: Persistent Israeli Presence on the Border
A key feature of the plan is establishing a “security belt” along eastern Gaza-a strip covering roughly 18 percent of its land area-to remain under direct Israeli control.
This security zone is not intended as temporary but rather institutionalizes enduring Israeli presence.The proposal states such control should continue “until assured that no new armed threat emerges from Gaza.”
This signifies that Israel does not intend simply to leave Gazan territory but aims rather for security engineering designed to transform any exit into sustained presence under another guise.
According to Trump’s full plan text published by Reuters, this scheme extends beyond military matters and includes mechanisms for rebuilding Gaza.
The so-called “new Gaza” would be an area devoid of extremism governed by an interim Palestinian authority managed by international technocrats alongside Palestinians themselves-supervised by an international “Peace Council” with Trump playing a central role.
This temporary body would oversee reconstruction efforts, humanitarian aid distribution, and supervision over disarmament processes in Gaza. Despite its appealing image however,”new Gaza” risks serving primarily as justification for continued Israeli oversight framed within security mandates while restricting genuine Palestinian self-governance.
Disarmament or Forced Surrender?
A major plank involves total disarmament of Palestinian groups. According to Trump’s details all Hamas military infrastructure-including tunnels and weapon stockpiles-must be dismantled under self-reliant observers’ supervision.Hamas members willing to abandon militancy could securely relocate abroad if they choose.This approach effectively aims at crippling Palestinian resistance entirely.
Economic Pressure Coupled with Conditional Reconstruction
The Trump framework offers economic pledges: reconstructing infrastructure through international aid; establishing special economic zones; accelerating humanitarian access into shelter-deprived areas during conflict recovery stages.The reconstruction comes laced with strict conditions including international oversight considerable technocratic involvement,and linking economic measures with stringent security requirements.This means rebuilding won’t take place independently but within broader geopolitical-security agendas designed mainly around US-Israeli influence consolidation.Direct foreign assistance may thus prove less about uplifting Gazans’ daily lives than reinforcing external dominance over them.
Legitimizing Occupation
The apparent slogans promoting occupation end-of conflict-and reconstruction mask strategic objectives.Course-planned military pullbacks combined with buffer zone creation,inceptionof technocratic overseers,and harsh constraints on Palestinian authority reveal intentions primarily geared toward securing permanentIsraeli hegemony-notGazans’ freedom.Despite promises-the concept designates”newGazaa space constraining realPalestinian autonomy within imposed frameworks undermining their sovereigntyindependently exercised governance.”... .... This rewritten paragraph ends here unexpectedly – rephrased keeping tone cleanly
Conclusion
The White House-released map accompanying Trump’s proposal supposedly signals peace in ending fighting inGaza.Yet inherently,it servesas blueprintfor perpetuatingIsraelicontroland suppressing palestiniannational power.Progressive troop withdrawals,border buffer zones,reconstructionoversight,and enforced disarmamentunderpin structured plans maintaining influenceratherthan genuine relinquishment.
This strategy threatensPalestinians’ rights totheirself-determinationand sovereignty,it also posesgrave politicalhumanitarian dangersforthe Strip’s future.Disabled freedoms disguise masked continuanceof occupation throughdeceptive rhetoriccirculatingfreedomwhilenormalizing durable dominance.
