The US has a bold, yet controversial plan for Gaza's future, which involves dividing the region into distinct zones. This plan, outlined in military documents, aims to create a 'green zone' under the control of international and Israeli troops, where reconstruction efforts can begin. However, the rest of Gaza, dubbed the 'red zone', is left in ruins, raising serious questions about the US's commitment to a lasting peace and Palestinian sovereignty.
According to these documents, foreign forces, including European troops, are set to deploy alongside Israeli soldiers in eastern Gaza. This division, marked by the current Israeli-controlled 'yellow line', is a cause for concern among humanitarian organizations and mediators. They warn of a potential limbo state, where Gaza remains divided, with regular Israeli attacks and an entrenched occupation, hindering any progress towards self-rule and reconstruction.
The US's 'peace plan', proposed by Donald Trump, relies on the creation of an international stabilization force (ISF). This force is intended to oversee the withdrawal of Israeli troops and facilitate large-scale rebuilding. However, the plan has faced skepticism, with some sources describing it as 'delusional'. European leaders, weary from long missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, are reluctant to risk their soldiers' lives in Gaza, despite offering other forms of support.
The documents, marked as unclassified, suggest the US is not treating this plan as highly sensitive. Yet, the reality on the ground is far more complex. Jordan, listed as a potential contributor, has explicitly ruled out sending troops due to its close political ties with Gaza. With over half of Jordanians having Palestinian descent, such a move would be an explosive threat to Jordan's national security.
The US's 'concept of operation' for the ISF specifies that troops will only operate within the 'green zone'. This zone, under Israeli and international control, is seen as a path towards reuniting Gaza, by enticing Palestinian civilians to move across the line of control. However, this strategy risks drawing comparisons to US failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, where 'green zones' became enclaves of western forces, isolated from the communities they were meant to protect.
The plan to use aid as a lure, after a war deemed genocidal by a UN commission, echoes disastrous US policies from those conflicts. The need for urgent reconstruction is evident, with over 80% of structures in Gaza damaged or destroyed, including vital infrastructure like schools and hospitals. Yet, Israel continues to limit aid shipments, barring basic items, leaving nearly 1.5 million Palestinians in need of emergency shelter and hundreds of thousands more living in tents without access to essential services.
This US plan, while well-intentioned, faces significant challenges and raises important questions about the role of international forces in resolving complex conflicts. It remains to be seen whether this strategy can bring about the desired peace and stability in Gaza, or if it will become another controversial chapter in the region's troubled history.
