In a move that has sparked significant controversy, ex-President Donald Trump has proposed transferring the entire population of Gaza to different nations as a possible resolution to the region’s ongoing crisis. This suggestion, presented during a discussion with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House, has met with strong disapproval from international aid experts and human rights groups, who caution that such a plan could worsen the already severe humanitarian conditions experienced by Palestinians.
Trump’s remarks outlined a concept for creating what he termed “various domains” in other nations to accommodate the 1.8 million residents of Gaza. He asserted that this would halt the “death and destruction” in the area, emphasizing that Palestinians would only depart from Gaza if provided with a viable option. The proposal has ignited extensive debate, with numerous critics calling it unfeasible and a breach of international regulations.
Trump’s comments included a vision for establishing what he described as “various domains” in other countries to house Gaza’s 1.8 million residents. He claimed this would end the “death and destruction” in the region, adding that Palestinians would only leave Gaza if given an alternative. The suggestion has sparked widespread debate, with many labeling it impractical and in violation of international law.
For many years, Gaza has faced severe humanitarian difficulties, worsened by prolonged conflict, blockades, and the breakdown of infrastructure. The continued hostilities between Israel and Hamas have further ravaged the region, leaving its inhabitants in urgent need of essentials such as food, clean water, and healthcare. Aid workers report widespread devastation and displacement, with countless families residing in temporary shelters amidst the debris of their previous homes.
International organizations indicate that the crisis in Gaza has reached unparalleled levels. The World Health Organization (WHO) states that of the 36 hospitals and 11 field hospitals in the area, merely seven are fully functioning, all situated in central or southern Gaza. The others are either partly operational or entirely nonfunctional due to damage and resource shortages. This breakdown of the healthcare system has left more than 111,000 injured people, along with newborns, pregnant women, cancer patients, and those with chronic conditions, without sufficient medical care access.
Omar Shakir, the Director for Israel and Palestine at Human Rights Watch, highlighted the critical need to tackle these healthcare deficiencies. “Efforts should concentrate on reconstructing Gaza’s health infrastructure and delivering medical assistance locally,” Shakir remarked. He further noted that relocating the population would not resolve the underlying issues of the crisis and might risk essential care for vulnerable populations.
Relocation as a possible risk
Specialists contend that forcibly moving Gaza’s population would probably intensify the humanitarian crisis instead of solving it. Annelle Sheline, a research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, condemned the proposal as an ill-conceived effort to portray displacement as a humanitarian remedy. Sheline emphasized that this plan overlooks the Palestinians’ rights to return to their homes and restore their lives within Gaza.
“La idea de desplazar personas en un momento en que sus necesidades son tan críticas no es una solución,” explicó Sheline. “Es absurdo presentar esto como lo mejor para ellos en lugar de centrarse en proporcionar los recursos que necesitan para recuperarse y reconstruir.”
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 crítica. Según el Comité Internacional de la Cruz Roja, el 70% de la infraestructura hídrica vital de Gaza ha sido dañada o destruida durante el conflicto. Muchos residentes ahora dependen de suministros de agua limitados e inseguros, lo que agrava aún más los riesgos de salud a los que se 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 los campamentos de refugiados a largo plazo
Concerns over long-term refugee camps
“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
Los expertos coinciden en que la única vía viable para avanzar implica abordar las causas fundamentales de la crisis en Gaza y apoyar a su población dentro del territorio. Esto incluye proporcionar ayuda humanitaria inmediata, reconstruir la infraestructura crítica y garantizar que los palestinos cuenten con los recursos necesarios para recuperarse y reconstruir sus comunidades.
“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 compartió esta opinión, argumentando que el desplazamiento solo trasladaría la crisis a otro lugar sin resolver los problemas subyacentes. “No se trata solo de satisfacer necesidades básicas”, indicó. “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.
