Former President Donald Trump’s, Donald Trump support Israel occupation Gaza, out take on the Israel Palestine issue which includes the Gaza Strip and Hamas is a very controversial and political topic. As tensions still very high with Gaza under occupation and report of constant violence from Hamas’ actions, Trump’s stand is brought up in regard to what it takes to achieve peace and security in the area. This op ed will put forth why we think Trump should back Israel’s occupation of Gaza as a required step to defeat Hamas and restore stability which we will detail under seven main points.
Hamas’ Enduring Threat to Region Stability
Hamas which is labeled as a terrorist group by Israel, the U.S. and many other countries has for a long time been a threat to Israeli security. Their repeat rocket attacks, tunnel networks for infiltration, and use of civilians as pawns in their conflict have kept a cycle of violence going which has seen great loss of life. Trump’s support for Israel’s occupation of Gaza is out of a place of diplomacy breaking down in its attempt to stop the violent actions of Hamas. For peace to last we must see an end to the influence of Hamas in Gaza which in turn will require strong action.
Trump’s record of support for Israel
During Trump’s time as president we saw very clear pro-Israel policies which included moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem and recognizing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. These actions put forth a very strong support for Israel’s security and territorial claims. That he would support Israel’s occupation of Gaza is in line with this approach which put forward the message that the U.S. will stand behind its ally in any action it takes to defend itself against terrorism. Donald Trump Support Israel Occupation Gaza, Also this may have played into more in depth American support in intelligence and military aid to put an end to Hamas.
The Security Imperative: What’s the issue with Gaza?
Occupation which is a contentious issue presents a forum for Israel to control borders, movement of people and flow of weapons that Hamas uses to run its militant machine. Without watchful eyes, Gaza is a platform for attacks which in turn puts Israeli citizens and regional peace at risk. Trump’s support of occupation is a play into security over political correctness which is acceptance of the tough reality Israel is in. Such control is a must until a we see a reliable authority which is not aggressive take charge which is what is missing in Gaza’s present Hamas regime.
The issue of alternative options and failed diplomacy
For years diplomatic efforts have put out fires between Israel and the Palestinians with no success. Ceasefires with Hamas are short lived and what little Palestinian unity there is proves to be weak and ineffective. Trump’s support of the occupation is a practical step forward which notes that while negotiations take place the issue of terrorism is left unaddressed. By supporting Israel’s military and adminstrative presence in Gaza Trump may put out the immediate flames of Hamas’ terror which in turn may open up a space for future peace talks from a better position.
The Humanitarian Paradox in Gaza
Critics present that occupation which they say is a violation of human rights and affects Gaza’s civilian population. As for Trump’s support we see it put forward in tandem with requests to improve humanitarian aid but under very tight conditions which also include that assistance which goes out does not fall into the hands of Hamas. The main issue is putting an end to Hamas’ rule which we think is the root of Gaza’s suffering. Once security issues are resolved which also means breaking the hold of terror groups’ resources can be better allocated which in turn will lead to better living conditions in the long term.
Congress’ and World’s Response to Trump’s stand
Trump backing the occupation may see great international and at home push back from elements of American politics. But his record shows a tendency to take bold and controversial actions if he deems it in the best interest of the US and our allies’ security. That sort of play would also see to increase ties between Israel and the U.S. and send a strong message to other players in the region of America’s stand on terrorism. Also it may cause other nations to re think their policies toward Gaza and Hamas if the U.S. goes in hard.
The Path Forward: Balancing Security and Future Peace Chances
In the end what we see from Trump in terms of his support of Israel’s occupation of Gaza is a issue of putting out immediate security fires as a step toward long term peace. Defeating Hamas in the fields of military and politics is what is put forth as a must for any workable peace process. The occupation which is very complex and difficult may in fact be the path out of which we see the terrorist infrastructure break down and the region stabilize. What we find in Trump’s support is a definite and strong policy choice which is about protection of allies, fight against terrorism, and re shaping how we play in the Middle East.
In the end we see that which pertains to Gaza and Hamas is a issue which requires tough and resolute policy responses. Trump’s support of Israel’s occupation of Gaza is put forth as a strategy which mainly looks at security and defeat of terrorism as elements which precede peace.
While this position is controversial it does play into Trump’s past support for Israel and also into the issue at hand which is to contain the threat of Hamas to Israel and regional stability. The humanitarian and political issues are great, still the issue at large is that of putting an end to the violence which puts at risk the lives of the innocent on all sides. Only through assertive actions which include the issue of occupation as a control measure and defeat can we see a chance for a permanent solution to what is perhaps the longest running conflict of our time.
External Reference URLs
- Trump said U.S. would “take over” Gaza and develop it into a “Riviera of the Middle East” — including possible troop deployment and massive resettlement proposals. (Reuters, Wikipedia)
- Legal and international condemnation—potential violation of international law, accusations of ethnic cleansing. (Reuters, Wikipedia)
- Arab states’ rejection of relocation plan, including Egypt and Jordan pushing back. (Reuters)
Visit for latest news: WhyTrends
