Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu‘s objective from the outset of his “revenge” campaign against Gaza, initiated 16 months ago, appears to be either ethnic cleansing or genocide.

For the subsequent 15 months, former US President Joe Biden acted as an accomplice in this genocide, while current US President Donald Trump is now seen as an ally in the ethnic cleansing efforts.

Biden supplied the 2,000-pound bombs used in the genocide, whereas Trump is reportedly providing the even more powerful 11-ton MOAB, or massive ordnance air blast bomb, designed to further encourage the population’s displacement.

Biden asserted that Israel was assisting the people of Gaza through what he termed “carpet bombing” to “eradicate” Hamas. In contrast, Trump claims he is aiding the people of Gaza by “cleaning them out” from the aftermath of the resulting “demolition site.”

Biden referred to the destruction of 70 percent of Gaza’s infrastructure as “self-defense,” while Trump describes the impending destruction of the remaining 30 percent as “all hell breaking loose.”

Biden has stated he is “working tirelessly for a ceasefire,” yet he has simultaneously supported Israel’s ongoing attacks on children month after month.

Trump, on the other hand, claims to have brokered a ceasefire, despite ignoring Israel’s violations of its terms, which include continued assaults on Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, obstructing the entry of essential aid trucks, allowing minimal supplies of promised tents or mobile homes, denying many injured Palestinians access to treatment abroad, blocking the return of displaced Palestinians to their homes in northern Gaza, and neglecting to advance the second phase of ceasefire discussions.

Israeli violations, although frequently characterized by the media as mere “claims” from Hamas, were substantiated to the New York Times by three Israeli officials and two mediators.

In essence, Israel has contravened the agreement on all fronts, with Trump unwaveringly supporting this favored ally, just as Biden did previously.

“let hell break loose”

As Israel was well aware when it violated the ceasefire, Hamas had only one means of leverage to enforce the agreement: withholding the release of additional hostages. This is exactly what the Palestinian group declared last Monday, stating they would not release more hostages until Israel began to comply with the agreement.

In a predictable display, Israel and Washington feigned outrage.

Trump quickly escalated the situation, granting Israel—or perhaps the US, as he was ambiguous—the go-ahead to “let hell break loose,” presumably referring to the resumption of violence.

This escalation is contingent not only on Hamas’s refusal to release the three scheduled hostages by the noon deadline this Saturday but also on Trump’s insistence that Hamas must now release all hostages.

The US president stated he would no longer tolerate the gradual release of hostages over the six-week initial phase of the ceasefire. In effect, Trump is undermining the very terms of the ceasefire that his own administration negotiated.

It is evident that neither Netanyahu nor Trump is making any effort to preserve the agreement; instead, they are actively seeking to dismantle it.

According to a report from Israel’s Haaretz newspaper last weekend, Israeli sources indicated that Netanyahu aims to “derail” the ceasefire before it progresses to the second phase, which involves the complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from the enclave and the initiation of reconstruction efforts.

A source mentioned to the publication, “If Hamas understands that a second stage is off the table, they may not fulfill the first.”

Hamas has insisted on a phased release of hostages to gain time, fully aware that Israel would be eager to resume military actions as soon as the hostages are returned.

The situation for the Palestinians in Gaza has reverted to its original state.

They must either accept the prospect of ethnic cleansing to allow Trump and his wealthy associates to profit from transforming the enclave into the “Riviera of the Middle East,” funded by appropriating the revenues from Gaza’s gas fields, or confront the possibility of renewed genocide.

Israel has not succeeded in achieving its declared goals

Netanyahu’s agreement to Washington’s so-called “ceasefire” was clearly insincere, as it was merely a temporary pause. This pause allowed the U.S. to shift from a narrative of “humanitarianism” and “security” associated with Biden to the more direct and aggressive approach favored by Trump.

Currently, the focus has shifted to the “art of the deal” and potential real estate ventures.

However, Trump’s intention to “own” Gaza and subsequently “clean it out” has left his European allies—essentially his subordinates—uncomfortable.

Trump has a troubling tendency to vocalize what others keep hidden, stripping away the fragile facade of Western decency and making everyone appear unfavorable.

The reality is that over the past 15 months, Israel has not succeeded in achieving its declared goals in Gaza—eliminating Hamas and securing the return of hostages—because these objectives were never genuinely pursued.

Even Antony Blinken, Biden’s Secretary of State, acknowledged that Israel’s extensive military actions had only succeeded in increasing Hamas’s recruitment, matching the number of fighters killed.

Israeli military whistleblowers disclosed to the website +972 last week that numerous hostages had been killed by Israel through the use of indiscriminate bunker-buster bombs supplied by the United States.

These bombs not only created extensive blast zones but also acted as chemical agents, inundating Hamas’ tunnels with carbon monoxide and leading to the asphyxiation of the hostages.

The Israeli leadership’s disregard for the hostages’ well-being was corroborated by former defense minister Yoav Gallant during an interview with Israeli TV Channel 12.

He acknowledged that the army had implemented the so-called Hannibal directive during Hamas’ breakout from Gaza on October 7, 2023, which permitted soldiers to kill Israelis rather than allow them to be captured by the Palestinian group.

These revelations, which provide a different perspective on Israel’s actions in Gaza, have largely been ignored by the mainstream Western media.

Damage control

From the beginning, Israel’s objective has been the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, a stance that Trump has now made explicit.

So explicit, in fact, that the media has been compelled to engage in extensive damage control, executing one of the most intense psychological operations against their own audiences on record.

A plethora of euphemisms has been employed to obscure the reality that Trump and Israel are preparing to ethnically cleanse the remaining 2.3 million Palestinians residing in Gaza.

The BBC discusses terms such as “resettling,” “relocating,” and “moving away” regarding the population of Gaza.

In various reports, Palestinians are described as being on the verge of “leaving” without clear explanation.

The New York Times refers to ethnic cleansing in a favorable light as Trump’s “development plan,” while Reuters casually describes it as “moving out” the population of Gaza.

Western governments and their aligned media find themselves in a difficult situation because Washington’s allied states in the Middle East have declined to support Israel and Trump’s plan for ethnic cleansing.

Despite the escalating violence, Egypt has not opened its limited border with Gaza to allow the bombarded and starving population to enter the neighboring Sinai region.

There has never been any expectation that Israel would permit Gaza’s families to return to the lands from which they were forcibly removed in 1948 to establish a self-proclaimed Jewish state.

Western powers have historically collaborated in Israel’s ethnic cleansing efforts, a context that is often overlooked by the media. When they do acknowledge any background, it is typically framed through a lens of presumed Palestinian violence rather than the broader historical narrative. Instead of addressing the root causes, the media frequently resorts to vague phrases like “cycles of violence” and “historic enmities.”

In light of recent comments from Trump, Western politicians and media outlets have attempted to portray his administration’s “development plan” for Gaza as a novel approach.

However, the reality is that the president is not proposing anything new in his call for the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in Gaza. The distinction lies in his unusually candid acknowledgment of a policy that has been in place for some time.

Israel has consistently aimed to remove Palestinians from Gaza to Egypt and from the West Bank to Jordan.

United States has supported the Gaza aspect of this expulsion strategy since the latter part of George W. Bush’s second term in 2007. For those keeping track, that was 18 years ago.

Every U.S. president, including Barack Obama, has sought the cooperation of Egypt’s leaders to permit Israel to push Gaza’s residents into Sinai, yet each attempt has been met with resistance.

Widely Acknowledged Secret

This widely acknowledged secret remains obscure for the same reason that many Western commentators and politicians are now feigning shock at Trump’s actual promotion of it.

Why is this the case? Because it presents a negative image, especially when framed within Trump’s crude real estate rhetoric during a supposed ceasefire.

Western leaders had aimed to execute the ethnic cleansing of Gaza with greater subtlety—through a “humanitarian” approach that would more effectively mislead Western audiences and preserve the West’s assertion of upholding civilized values against alleged Palestinian savagery.

Since 2007, the collaborative ethnic cleansing initiative between Washington and Israel has been referred to as the “Greater Gaza Plan.”

The siege imposed by Israel on the small enclave, which commenced in late 2006, was intended to inflict such extreme hardship and deprivation that the inhabitants would desperately seek to escape.

This was the period when Israel began to devise a so-called “starvation diet” for Gaza’s population, meticulously calculating calories to ensure survival, albeit barely.

Israel viewed Gaza as a tube of toothpaste that could be squeezed; once Egypt agreed to open the border, the population would pour into Sinai out of sheer desperation.

Every Egyptian president—Hosni Mubarak, Mohamed Morsi, and General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi—was pressured and incentivized to comply, yet all stood firm in their refusal.

Egypt was acutely aware of the implications following October 7, 2023. It recognized that Israel’s extensive bombardment of Gaza aimed to exert such pressure that it would lead to a complete breakdown of the region.

Pressure on Egypt

From the beginning, figures such as Giora Eiland, Israel’s former national security adviser, openly declared that the objective was to render Gaza “a place where no human being can exist.”

Just a week into the violence in October 2023, military spokesperson Amir Avivi informed the BBC that Israel could not guarantee the safety of civilians in Gaza. He stated, “They need to move south, out to the Sinai Peninsula.”

The following day, Danny Ayalon, a close associate of Netanyahu and former Israeli ambassador to the US, reinforced this message: “There is almost endless space in the Sinai Desert… We and the international community will prepare the infrastructure for tent cities.”

He concluded with the assertion: “Egypt will have to cooperate.”

Israel’s strategy was further revealed in a leaked policy document from its intelligence ministry, which suggested that after their displacement, Gaza’s residents would initially be accommodated in tent cities, with plans for permanent settlements to be established in northern Sinai.

Simultaneously, the Financial Times disclosed that Netanyahu was advocating to the European Union for the relocation of Palestinians from the enclave to Sinai under the guise of war.

Certain EU nations, notably the Czech Republic and Austria, reportedly showed interest and raised the proposal during a meeting of member states. An anonymous European diplomat informed the FT: “This is the moment to intensify pressure on the Egyptians to consent.”

In the meantime, the Biden administration provided munitions to sustain the pressure.

Sisi was acutely aware of the challenges facing Egypt: a coordinated Western initiative aimed at the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. This situation had no connection to Trump, who was still over a year away from his presidential election.

In mid-October 2023, just days into the violence, Sisi addressed the issue in a press conference alongside German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, stating: “What is currently occurring in Gaza is an effort to compel civilian residents to seek refuge and migrate to Egypt, which must not be tolerated.”

He invested considerable effort in reinforcing the short border between Gaza and Sinai, both prior to and following the onset of Israel’s actions.

Peace sales pitch

What makes Trump’s sales pitch particularly surreal is his lackluster adherence to the original narrative, attempting to frame the plan in a somewhat humanitarian light.

While simultaneously rearming Israel and cautioning that “all hell will break loose,” he has mentioned the possibility of identifying “parcels of land” in Egypt and Jordan where the residents of Gaza “can live very happily and very safely.”

He juxtaposes this with their current situation: “They are being killed there at levels that nobody’s ever seen. No place in the world is as dangerous as the Gaza Strip… They are living in hell.”

This seems to reveal Trump’s perspective on the genocide that Israel claims it is not perpetrating and that the US asserts it is not supporting.

However, the discussion about aiding Gaza’s population appears to be mere remnants of the previous sales pitch, reminiscent of earlier US administrations that sought to present ethnic cleansing as a necessary component of the much-touted “peace process.”

Washington became involved in the Greater Gaza Plan as early as 2007. The initial proposal suggested that Egypt would allocate a 1,600 square kilometer area in Sinai—five times larger than Gaza—to the Palestinian leadership in the West Bank, led by Mahmoud Abbas.

Palestinians residing in Gaza would be “encouraged” to relocate, which effectively meant they would face pressure through the ongoing siege, aid blockades, and sporadic military operations referred to as “mowing the lawn.”

In exchange, Abbas would need to relinquish the pursuit of a Palestinian state within historic Palestine, compromise the right of return for Palestinian refugees as recognized by international law, and shift the responsibility for managing Palestinian repression onto Egypt and the broader Arab community.

From 2007 to 2018, Israel promoted the Sinai plan with the intention of undermining Abbas’ efforts at the United Nations to gain recognition for Palestinian statehood.

It is significant to note that Israel’s extensive military operations in Gaza during the winters of 2008, 2012, and 2014 coincided with reported Israeli and U.S. pressures on successive Egyptian leaders to agree to cede portions of Sinai.

Waterfront property

Trump has a comprehensive understanding of the Greater Gaza Plan from his previous presidency. Reports from 2018 indicate that he intended to incorporate it into his “deal of the century,” aimed at fostering normalization between Israel and the Arab nations.

In March of that year, the White House convened a conference with representatives from 19 countries to explore innovative solutions for Gaza’s escalating crisis, which was largely attributed to Israeli actions.

Participants included not only Israel but also delegates from Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates. The Palestinian representatives chose to boycott the event.

Later that summer, Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and the main architect of his Middle East strategy, traveled to Egypt. Shortly thereafter, Hamas dispatched a delegation to Cairo to gain insights into the proposals being discussed.

At that time, as is the case now, Trump was proposing a specially designed zone in Sinai, featuring a solar power grid, a desalination facility, a seaport, and an airport, along with a free trade area comprising five industrial zones, funded by the affluent Gulf states.

Notably, veteran Israeli journalist Ron Ben-Yishai reported that Israel was threatening to invade and divide Gaza into distinct northern and southern regions to compel Hamas to comply. This strategy was precisely what Israel prioritized during its invasion last year, which aimed to evacuate northern Gaza of its inhabitants.

Trump aimed to exacerbate the situation in Gaza by withholding funds from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). This approach was similarly adopted by Israel and the Biden administration amid the ongoing humanitarian crisis.

Since Trump assumed the presidency, Israel has prohibited UNRWA operations throughout the occupied Palestinian territories.

Trump’s administration reignited its interest in the ethnic cleansing strategy as soon as Israel initiated its campaign of violence, well before Trump was aware of the outcome of the November 2024 election.

In March of the previous year, Kushner echoed sentiments similar to those expressed by Trump today. He remarked that “there’s not much of Gaza left at this point,” emphasizing the need to “clean it up” and referring to it as “valuable waterfront property.” He asserted that the residents of Gaza would need to be “moved out.”

Counter-proposal

If Trump remains steadfast in his position, the future for the people of Gaza largely depends on the responses of neighboring Egypt and Jordan. They face a choice: either accept the ethnic cleansing plan or witness Israel continue its campaign against Gaza’s population.

Should they refuse, Trump has warned of potential cuts to U.S. aid—essentially long-standing incentives for both nations to refrain from assisting the Palestinians while Israel carries out its actions.

King Abdullah of Jordan appeared visibly apprehensive during his recent visit to the White House, resembling a deer caught in headlights.

He refrained from directly confronting Trump about the proposed plan, instead suggesting a wait-and-see approach regarding Egypt’s response, given its status as a more influential Arab nation.

However, Abdullah harbors deep concerns about the potential destabilization that could arise from Jordan’s involvement in what he perceives as Gaza’s ethnic cleansing—an issue he considers critical to his regime’s survival. He has even hinted at the possibility of military action against Israel to prevent this.

Egypt, too, has expressed its dissatisfaction. Following Abdullah’s uncomfortable visit, President Sisi has reportedly delayed his upcoming meeting with Trump, signaling his disapproval until the ethnic cleansing proposal is withdrawn.

Cairo is believed to be formulating its own plan for Gaza’s reconstruction. Even Saudi Arabia, a key ally of the U.S. with significant oil wealth, is showing signs of dissent.

It is uncommon for Arab nations to exhibit such assertiveness towards a U.S. president, particularly one as self-absorbed and erratic as Trump.

This may account for the apparent softening of Trump’s stance. On Wednesday, his press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, indicated that Trump is now looking for a counter-proposal from “our Arab partners in the region,” suggesting a desire for a “peace plan to present to the president.”

In another indication of Trump’s wavering position, Netanyahu has retracted his ultimatum regarding the resumption of military action, now only insisting on the release of the three hostages originally mentioned.

Reports from Gaza indicate that Israel has also significantly increased its aid deliveries, which is encouraging news and may provide the people of Gaza with some additional respite.

It is essential to maintain perspective on the broader context. Both Israel and the United States remain dedicated to the objective of “clearing out” Gaza, a goal they have pursued for the last 18 years. They are merely waiting for a more favorable opportunity to act again.

This could occur as soon as this weekend or perhaps in a month or two. However, one significant outcome of the actions taken by both Biden and Trump is that they have ensured that the devastation of Gaza can no longer be misconstrued as a strategy for peace.