ِAfrasianet - Doctor Mahmoud Alhanafy - In a world governed by strategic interests and geographic politics, US President Donald Trump has sparked controversy with his plan to displace 2.2 million Palestinians from the Gaza Strip to Egypt and Jordan.
This plan, justified in terms such as "cleansing" Gaza of its population after a devastating 15-month war, faces major legal and international obstacles, inspired by historical strategies that have failed to achieve their goals.
In this article, we review the legal dimensions of this controversial plan, shed light on historical attempts at forced displacement, and examine the mechanisms through which Egypt and Jordan, along with the international community, can counter these plans, with a focus on strengthening the steadfastness of Palestinians as a strategic choice that preserves their rights and national identity.
The International Context of the Trump Plan
US President Donald Trump's remarks on the plan to transfer Palestinians from Gaza to Egypt and Jordan came in a complex international context characterized by escalating tensions in the Middle East, where Gaza has witnessed repeated Israeli wars that have led to a deterioration in the humanitarian situation.
These statements were linked to the "deal of the century" plan launched by Trump as part of a political settlement aimed at promoting Israel's interests by making economic promises to the Palestinians without fulfilling their legitimate political rights, which was widely rejected.
It also coincided with the Trump administration's push to sign normalization agreements between Israel and a number of Arab countries (the Abraham Accords), which contributed to reducing pressure on Israel towards the Palestinian issue. Internationally, the plan came amid US tensions with Iran, which supports Palestinian armed factions in Gaza, with the aim of weakening Iranian influence in the region.
Internally, Trump has been seeking to boost his popularity with his pro-Israel base, especially evangelical Christians, in the run-up to the elections, while pressuring Egypt and Jordan to assume additional responsibilities towards Palestinian refugees, relieving Israel of any political, economic, or security burdens.
Historic plans to deport Palestinians and the reasons for their failure
History has witnessed multiple attempts to deport or resettle Palestinians outside their homeland, all of which failed to achieve their goals due to political complexities and popular resistance.
The most prominent of these attempts was the 1955 Sinai settlement project, which Israel proposed with British and American support to settle Palestinian refugees in North Sinai, but faced firm Egyptian rejection led by Gamal Abdel Nasser and strong Palestinian opposition.
Attempts to settle Palestinians in Jordan also emerged during the sixties and seventies, which caused an escalation of tension between Palestinian factions and the Jordanian regime, and ended with the events of Black September 1970.
The United Nations and Western countries have also put forward plans such as international resettlement programs through UNRWA, which called for settling Palestinians in host countries in exchange for financial support, but were met with decisive rejection from Palestinian refugees who insisted on the right of return, and Arab countries that feared liquidating the Palestinian cause or disturbing the political balance. The reasons for the failure of these attempts are due to the Palestinians' adherence to their national rights, and the refusal of Arab countries to hold them responsible for resolving the issue on behalf of Israel.
Israel's Attempts to Expel Palestinians: A Timeline of Stated Goals and Ongoing Failures
For decades, Israel has sought to displace Palestinians, especially in the Gaza Strip, using security and military pretexts to evacuate residential areas and create demographic change that serves its strategic interests. These attempts began early but were clearly demonstrated during a military operation called Protective Edge in 2014, where the occupation army targeted areas in the northern Gaza Strip such as Beit Hanoun and Beit Lahia with intensive shelling, with warnings to residents to evacuate their homes. Despite the temporary displacement of some families to shelters, most residents returned immediately after the fighting ended. This led to the failure of Israel's attempt to bring about lasting demographic change.
In subsequent years, Israeli goals became more evident through statements by senior officials, emphasizing the quest to displace or liquidate Palestinians. For example, Israel's Minister of National Security, Itamar Ben-Gvir, called for the "resettlement of hundreds of thousands of Gazans," while Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich supported measures aimed at demographic change in the Strip. These statements drew widespread international condemnation and were described as evidence of Israel's intentions to radically change Gaza's demographics.
During the last war on Gaza in 2023, Israeli attempts to achieve these goals escalated. Israel has also explicitly declared its goal of evacuating the northern Gaza Strip by claiming to eliminate Hamas resistance tunnels and infrastructure. Israel has resorted to the use of heavy shelling and mass warnings to force the population to flee to the south.
Despite the intensity of the shelling and the targeting of large areas such as Jabalia, Beit Lahia and Beit Hanoun, as well as health infrastructure, especially Kamal Adwan Hospital, Palestinians resisted these pressures, arguing that the evacuation paves the way for permanent forced displacement. As the operations ended, residents gradually returned to their homes, demonstrating Israel's failure to impose lasting demographic change.
In this context, Israeli historian Benny Morris highlights in his writings, such as "1948 and Thereafter" and "The Nakba: The Story of the Arab-Israeli Conflict", that Israeli policies towards Palestinians have always included an element of forced displacement as part of a strategic plan.
Morris points out that the Palestinian displacement during the 1948 Nakba was not merely the result of the war, but was part of a deliberate policy of ethnic cleansing aimed at reducing the Arab population inside the occupied territories. He also asserts that subsequent attempts, including major wars such as Protective Edge and the 2023 war on Gaza, were aimed at achieving Israeli demographic dominance, but failed due to Palestinian steadfastness and international pressure.
In addition to military operations, an Amnesty International investigation has indicated that Israel is committing acts amounting to genocide, including deliberate killing, physical and psychological harm to the population, as well as subjecting them to harsh living conditions aimed at destroying them. These policies reflect a clear Israeli attempt to liquidate the Palestinian presence in Gaza through a combination of displacement and extermination.
Israel's attempts to deport Palestinians, despite its ferocity and constant escalation, have revealed a permanent inability to achieve its goals. This is due to the steadfastness of the Palestinians and their determination to hold on to their land.
International law and confronting forced displacement: strong texts and implementation challenges
International law categorically rejects forced displacement, based on key provisions condemning such practices in times of war and peace. The Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 provides in article 49 the prohibition of forcible transfer of population from occupied territory, and article 147 describes forced displacement as a grave violation and a war crime.
The Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome, 1998) also reinforces this position, with Article 8(2)(b)(8) criminalizing unlawful displacement, while Article 7(1)(d) considers forced displacement a crime against humanity if carried out on a widespread or systematic basis.
In addition, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirms the right of individuals to freedom of movement and to choose their place of residence, while United Nations resolutions, such as resolution 242 (1967) and resolution 194 (1948), affirm the rejection of the acquisition of territory by force and the guarantee of the right of Palestinian refugees to return.
The displacement of Palestinians not only constitutes a flagrant violation of international law, but also means in practice the liquidation of the Palestinian cause and the burial of the aspirations of the Palestinian people to build their state.
Whether in the West Bank, Gaza Strip or Jerusalem, the displacement aims to uproot the Palestinian people from their historical roots and turn the land into a fully Israeli settlement enterprise, making any path towards a two-state solution impossible.
International laws provide a strong framework for condemning forced displacement, as their texts serve as a reference for political and diplomatic pressure on Israel through international organizations such as the United Nations and the International Criminal Court.
However, the application of this law faces significant challenges; the absence of effective enforcement mechanisms relies heavily on the cooperation of states, making the enforcement of sentences difficult in the event of the accused parties' refusal to comply.
In addition, there is a double standard in international where major powers such as the United States protect Israel from international sanctions, as documented in several resolutions blocked by the Security Council.
The current geopolitical environment also creates barriers to achieving sufficient international consensus to impose sanctions, as was the case at the UN General Assembly, where some countries refused to recognize displacement as a crime. To achieve real success, international political will must be strengthened, public and human rights pressure must be increased, and legal platforms must be exploited to raise coherent cases that expose these practices and hold Israel accountable for international accountability. Without this, international law will remain a powerful tool on paper but with limited impact in reality.
The practical position of Egypt and Jordan in the face of the plan to displace the Palestinians
Both Egypt and Jordan oppose any attempts at forcible displacement of Palestinians as a flagrant violation of international law, in particular the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits forcible transfer of populations, and the Statute of the International Criminal Court, which classifies forced displacement as a war crime and a crime against humanity. It also contradicts the axioms of Arab national security and is entitled to support the Palestinian cause.
Both countries have previously rejected similar plans because of their direct impact on their internal stability, as well as the failure of Israel or its Western allies to offer acceptable political solutions.
The official and diplomatic positions of Egypt and Jordan, announced in clear statements, increase international pressure on Israel and expose it to widespread criticism, which supports the steadfastness of the Palestinians on their land and prevents any political cover for displacement attempts.
In practice, Egypt and Jordan can take deliberate steps to prevent the implementation of any forced displacement plans. Strengthen border controls to ensure that Palestinians are not forcibly displaced, while ensuring a safe and sustainable flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza to ease economic and humanitarian pressures that may drive the population to displacement.
In this context, Egypt in particular should counter Israeli and U.S. pressure that could impede the entry of aid or the transit of people for humanitarian purposes.
The two countries should also support Palestinians inside the Gaza Strip by cooperating with international organizations, while activating regional and international coordination through the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation to mobilize a unified Arab position that reinforces Israel's isolation on the international stage.
These efforts prevent any demographic changes in Gaza and keep the Palestinian issue in the spotlight of international attention, while emphasizing the Palestinians' right of return.