In a move sparking significant debate, former President Donald Trump has proposed transferring the whole population of Gaza to other nations as a possible remedy for the persistent issues in the area. This suggestion, put forward during a discussion with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House, has been met with strong disapproval from global aid specialists and human rights defenders, who caution that this plan could worsen the already critical humanitarian conditions affecting Palestinians.
In a highly controversial move, former President Donald Trump has suggested relocating Gaza’s entire population to other countries as a potential solution to the ongoing crisis in the region. The proposal, made during a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House, has drawn sharp criticism from international aid experts and human rights advocates, who warn that such a plan could exacerbate the already dire humanitarian situation faced by Palestinians.
Persistent humanitarian issues in Gaza
Gaza’s ongoing humanitarian crisis
For decades, Gaza has struggled with extreme humanitarian challenges, compounded by years of conflict, blockades, and infrastructure collapse. The ongoing war between Israel and Hamas has further devastated the territory, leaving its population in desperate need of basic necessities like food, clean water, and medical care. Aid workers describe scenes of widespread destruction and displacement, with thousands of families living in makeshift shelters amid the rubble of their former homes.
According to international organizations, Gaza’s crisis has reached unprecedented levels. The World Health Organization (WHO) reports that out of 36 hospitals and 11 field hospitals in the region, only seven remain fully operational, all located in central or southern Gaza. The rest are either partially functioning or completely out of service due to damage and a lack of resources. This collapse of the healthcare system has left over 111,000 injured individuals, along with newborns, pregnant women, cancer patients, and those with chronic illnesses, without access to adequate medical care.
Omar Shakir, Israel and Palestine Director at Human Rights Watch, emphasized the urgency of addressing these healthcare gaps. “The focus must be on rebuilding Gaza’s health system and providing medical aid on the ground,” Shakir stated. He added that displacing the population would not address the root causes of the crisis and could jeopardize access to essential care for vulnerable groups.
Displacement as a potential threat
Experts argue that forcibly relocating Gaza’s population would likely worsen the humanitarian crisis rather than resolve it. Annelle Sheline, a research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, criticized the proposal as a misguided attempt to reframe displacement as a humanitarian solution. Sheline pointed out that such a plan disregards the rights of Palestinians to return to their homes and rebuild their lives within Gaza.
El desplazamiento también plantea serias preocupaciones legales y éticas. El derecho internacional prohíbe la remoción forzada permanente de poblaciones civiles. Además, los expertos advierten que trasladar a los residentes de Gaza a entornos desconocidos podría causar inestabilidad a largo plazo y agravar aún más las vulnerabilidades existentes, como la desnutrición y la falta de acceso a agua potable.
Escasez de alimentos y agua
Food insecurity and water shortages
La escasez de agua es otra preocupación crucial. Según el Comité Internacional de la Cruz Roja, el 70% de la infraestructura de agua vital en Gaza ha sido dañada o destruida durante el conflicto. Muchos residentes dependen ahora de suministros de agua limitados e inseguros, lo que agrava aún más los riesgos de salud que enfrentan.
Water shortages are another critical concern. According to the International Committee of the Red Cross, 70% of Gaza’s vital water infrastructure has been damaged or destroyed during the conflict. Many residents are now reliant on limited and unsafe water supplies, further compounding the health risks they face.
Preocupaciones sobre campos de refugiados a largo plazo
Los detractores de la propuesta de reubicación de Trump han advertido sobre la posible creación de campos de refugiados a largo plazo. Sheline mencionó los comentarios de Jared Kushner, yerno y exasesor principal de Trump, que sugieren la posibilidad de trasladar a los habitantes de Gaza al desierto del Néguev en el sur de Israel. Sheline comparó esta idea con la creación de un campamento de refugiados permanente, señalando que tales condiciones probablemente serían mucho peores que las que existían en Gaza antes de la guerra.
“El problema fundamental no se trata solo de sobrevivir,” afirmó Sheline. “Los palestinos tienen el derecho a la autodeterminación y a un estado propio. El desplazamiento no aborda esta aspiración esencial y, en cambio, corre el riesgo de dejarlos en el limbo, dependientes de la ayuda y sin un futuro claro.”
La necesidad de soluciones sostenibles
The need for sustainable solutions
“El verdadero enfoque debe estar en salvar vidas y ofrecer soluciones a largo plazo dentro de Gaza”, enfatizó Shakir. “Esto significa permitir la entrada de profesionales médicos y trabajadores humanitarios en la zona, aumentar las entregas de ayuda e invertir en proyectos que restituyan servicios esenciales como la atención médica, el agua y la electricidad”.
Sheline coincidió con este punto de vista, argumentando que el desplazamiento solo trasladaría la crisis a un nuevo lugar sin resolver los problemas subyacentes. “No se trata solo de satisfacer necesidades básicas,” señaló. “Los palestinos merecen la oportunidad de reconstruir sus hogares, sus comunidades y su futuro en su propia tierra.”
Sheline echoed this sentiment, arguing that displacement would only shift the crisis to a new location without resolving the underlying issues. “It’s not just about meeting basic needs,” she said. “Palestinians deserve the chance to rebuild their homes, their communities, and their futures in their own land.”
International response to the proposal
Además, la propuesta de Trump ha generado inquietudes sobre las implicaciones más amplias del desplazamiento forzoso. Los críticos sostienen que tal enfoque socava el derecho internacional y podría conducir a una mayor inestabilidad en una región ya volátil.
Additionally, Trump’s proposal has sparked concerns about the broader implications of forced displacement. Critics argue that such an approach undermines international law and could lead to further instability in an already volatile region.