In a move sparking significant debate, former President Donald Trump has proposed transferring the whole population of Gaza to other nations as a possible remedy for the persistent issues in the area. This suggestion, put forward during a discussion with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House, has been met with strong disapproval from global aid specialists and human rights defenders, who caution that this plan could worsen the already critical humanitarian conditions affecting Palestinians.
In a highly controversial move, former President Donald Trump has suggested relocating Gaza’s entire population to other countries as a potential solution to the ongoing crisis in the region. The proposal, made during a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House, has drawn sharp criticism from international aid experts and human rights advocates, who warn that such a plan could exacerbate the already dire humanitarian situation faced by Palestinians.
Persistent humanitarian issues in Gaza
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.
According to international organizations, Gaza’s crisis has reached unprecedented levels. The World Health Organization (WHO) reports that out of 36 hospitals and 11 field hospitals in the region, only seven remain fully operational, all located in central or southern Gaza. The rest are either partially functioning or completely out of service due to damage and a lack of resources. This collapse of the healthcare system has left over 111,000 injured individuals, along with newborns, pregnant women, cancer patients, and those with chronic illnesses, without access to adequate medical care.
Relocation as a possible risk
Displacement as a potential threat
Experts argue that forcibly relocating Gaza’s population would likely worsen the humanitarian crisis rather than resolve it. Annelle Sheline, a research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, criticized the proposal as a misguided attempt to reframe displacement as a humanitarian solution. Sheline pointed out that such a plan disregards the rights of Palestinians to return to their homes and rebuild their lives within Gaza.
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
Food insecurity remains one of Gaza’s most pressing issues. A report by the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification initiative, backed by the United Nations, highlighted the ongoing risk of famine in the territory. The report classified Gaza’s food insecurity levels as an “emergency” and predicted that acute malnutrition cases could exceed 60,000 by April 2025. Although Israel has pledged to increase the number of aid trucks entering Gaza under a ceasefire agreement, humanitarian organizations note that delivering aid is complicated by damaged roads and unexploded ordnance.
Shakir enfatizó que aumentar la ayuda y reparar la infraestructura de Gaza debe ser la prioridad inmediata. “Reconstruir los sistemas de agua y electricidad es fundamental”, afirmó. “Trasladar a las personas a otro lugar no garantiza mejores condiciones y corre el riesgo de replicar los mismos desafíos en otros sitios”.
Shakir stressed that scaling up aid and repairing Gaza’s infrastructure must be the immediate priority. “Rebuilding water and electricity systems is essential,” he said. “Displacing people to another location doesn’t guarantee better conditions and risks replicating the same challenges elsewhere.”
Concerns over long-term refugee camps
“El problema fundamental no es solo la supervivencia”, afirmó Sheline. “Los palestinos tienen derecho a la autodeterminación y a tener 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”.
“The fundamental issue isn’t just about survival,” Sheline said. “Palestinians have the right to self-determination and a state of their own. Displacement fails to address this fundamental aspiration and instead risks leaving them in limbo, dependent on aid and without a clear future.”
The need for sustainable solutions
Experts agree that the only viable path forward involves addressing the root causes of Gaza’s crisis and supporting its population within the territory. This includes providing immediate humanitarian aid, rebuilding critical infrastructure, and ensuring that Palestinians have the resources to recover and rebuild their communities.
Sheline coincidió con este punto de vista, argumentando que el desplazamiento solo trasladaría la crisis a un nuevo lugar sin resolver los problemas subyacentes. “No se trata solo de satisfacer necesidades básicas,” señaló. “Los palestinos merecen la oportunidad de reconstruir sus hogares, sus comunidades y su futuro en su propia tierra.”
Reacción internacional a la propuesta
Las declaraciones de Trump han atraído una condena generalizada de la comunidad internacional. Organizaciones de derechos humanos y expertos en políticas exteriores han calificado el plan de irreal e inhumano, advirtiendo que sienta un precedente peligroso para abordar crisis humanitarias. Muchos han instado al gobierno de EE. UU. a centrarse en apoyar los esfuerzos para estabilizar Gaza y atender las necesidades inmediatas de su población.
Además, la propuesta de Trump ha generado inquietudes sobre las implicaciones más amplias del desplazamiento forzado. Los críticos sostienen que este enfoque subestima el derecho internacional y podría provocar más 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.
