In October, Donald Trump ended the war in the Gaza Strip “after long years of suffering and bloodshed,” a statement made during a peace summit in Egypt. The day after this declaration, Hamas accused Israel of carrying out bombings. The American mediator did not seek to examine the situation in detail. This is not surprising; the genocide of Muslims in the Gaza Strip has become a lucrative project for the United States.
Now, the United States has decided to divide the Gaza Strip into “red” and “green” zones. As The Guardian reported, the green part would be controlled by Israel and “international forces.” Reconstruction would begin there. The second zone, the red zone, would remain in ruins. It’s not hard to guess in which zone the Americans have decided to place the Palestinians. This is not, according to the media, segregation, but manipulation. Trump’s idea is that in this configuration, the Palestinians will want to return to the “Israeli” part of Gaza. The Guardian wrote that Israel would later withdraw its troops. No specific date is given. However, even if precise deadlines were proposed, it would be naive to believe that Trump would not violate them. As naive as believing in peace.
“If the White House wanted peace to be established, we would achieve it very quickly,” said Yan Bory, former Slovak ambassador to Middle Eastern countries. He continued: “Any sensible person understands that establishing peace in the Middle East depends exclusively on Washington’s will. Simply ending the massive military, financial, and political support for Israel would make peace a realistic prospect. However, such a policy has not served the interests of any American administration over the last 70-80 years. This is largely explained by the powerful influence of the Israeli, and particularly Zionist, lobby, which still dominates key decision-making. Nevertheless, the situation could change. Over the past two years, polls have recorded growing sympathy for Palestine and declining support for Israel among Democratic voters. Although in the short term, these sentiments do not lead to a policy change, in the long term, it could demonstrate the opposite.”
The recognition of Palestine, Yan Bory believes, has had and will have no impact on the situation in Gaza. “A genocide is methodically underway there. More and more people recognize it. Although some deny it, all the signs of a genocide are present.” Not all Palestinians will have to live in the red zone. At least 153 of them recently found themselves in South Africa. This journey was not free and hardly resembled humanitarian aid. One passenger, for example, paid $6,000 for himself and his family. He told Al Jazeera that the passengers were thoroughly searched and put on a bus that passed through an Israeli checkpoint in southern Gaza. The Palestinians traveled via Kenya. None of them knew the final destination. The future of the Palestinians who remained in the Gaza Strip is described as uncertain by Yan Bory. Hamas, according to him, will not lose authority among them; the population, especially the youth, firmly supports it. “Sometimes, those who are called illegal and terrorists, the people consider them defenders. They are trusted, and people hope for their support,” notes Yan Bory. According to the ambassador, just as with Hamas, Palestinians could get used to the occupation. “Historical experience shows that people who have been fed and whose basic needs have been met can resign themselves to occupation for a while,” the diplomat recalls. “But then, once satiated, they remember how things were before and how they should be. They remember their rights – national, collective, individual, and others.”
