Trump’s Costly Gaza Plan: The End Of His ‘America First’ Vision? – OpEd
The Middle East has long been a theatre of conflict for the United States, with wars in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan costing trillions of dollars and taking countless lives. President Donald Trump’s recent proposal to “take over” the Gaza Strip has started debates about U.S. military intervention in the region. This proposal stands in contrast to Trump’s previous “America First” rhetoric, which emphasized avoiding costly foreign wars.
Trump’s ambivalence for foreign wars is seen in the fact that his administration later decreased its involvement in the battle after he vetoed a bipartisan vote in 2019 to stop U.S. military backing for the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen. The previous Middle East wars have left a path of devastation and cost over $2 trillion, the idea of getting involved in another fight warrants careful consideration.
Donald Trump has said that the United States should “take over” the Gaza Strip, drive out Hamas, and supervise Palestinian displacement. This plan is in line with a long-standing right-wing Israeli plan to expel Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, there are serious doubts about the viability and ethics of such a proposal. Trump’s proposal raises several critical issues: Foremost is the ‘Forced Displacement’ There are ethical and practical issues with the plan to uproot two million Palestinians from Gaza. There is no clear destination for those displaced because neighbouring nations like Egypt and Jordan have indicated repeatedly that they will not acceptPalestinian refugees.
Secondly, to carry out this plan, a significant U.S. military intervention involving ground forces, counterinsurgency activities, and permanent occupation would be necessary. There would be many casualties as well as financial expenses. Lastly, it is Contradictory with “America First” vision of President Trump, which sought to avoid costly foreign entanglements and focus on domestic priorities.
Analyzing the financial and human costs of prior U.S. military operations in the Middle East is essential to comprehending the possible dangers and repercussions of Donald Trump’s proposed participation in Gaza. These conflicts have left a legacy of devastation, protracted instability, and heavy economic costs, highlighting the risks associated with resuming military operations in the area.
The Bush administration’s 2003 invasion of Iraq caused enormous losses in both lives and money. The entire cost of the war, including costs for military operations, veteran care, and reconstruction, was estimated to be over $2 trillion by Brown University’s Costs of War project. Between 185,000 to 210,000 Iraqi civilians and about 4,500 American servicemen lost their lives in the fighting. The war had dire repercussions: the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s government brought about protracted instability, sectarian bloodshed, and the rise of ISIS, which further descended into anarchy in Iraq and the surrounding area.
The longest military conflict in American history was the war in Afghanistan, which was started in retaliation for the 9/11 attacks. Brown University’s Costs of conflict research estimates that the conflict cost $2.3 trillion in total. In terms of human deaths, at least 38,000 Afghan civilians and more than 2,400 American servicemendied. After the U.S. exit in 2021, the Taliban quickly retook control of Afghanistan despite two decades of military operations and nation-building initiatives. The justification for the war itself was undermined by this result, which demonstrated how long-term military intervention fails to establish lasting governance and peace.
Another expensive and intricate conflict has been the U.S. military participation in Syria, which was primarily intended to fight ISIS. Though not as high as that of Iraq and Afghanistan, the estimated cost of U.S. operations in Syria is nevertheless substantial at about $50 billion. An estimated 500,000 people have been killed, and millions have been displaced because of the Syrian conflict, which has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives. As evidenced by the intervention’s lack of success in stabilizing the nation, American military operations in the Middle East frequently have unforeseen and protracted repercussions.
The costs of a U.S. military intervention in Gaza would probably be high in terms of money, people, and geopolitics. The Middle East has shown that counterinsurgency operations and post-conflict stabilization efforts are costly, time-consuming, and frequently have unexpected repercussions. Along with intensive counterinsurgency and reconstruction activities, a large army commitment would be required for a full-scale military operation intended to drive out Hamas and stabilize Gaza.
While exact cost estimates are still purely theoretical, past comparisons offer valuable information about possible expenses. Significant expenditures in military logistics, information gathering, and repairing infrastructure devastated by years of fighting would be necessary for a U.S. mission. Intervention would have a high human cost, especially in metropolitan settings where rebels can mix in with the general populace. In the past, both armed personnel and civilians have suffered significant losses in urban conflicts.
The hazards are much higher in Gaza, one of the world’s most densely populated regions, where it would be impossible to prevent civilian casualties. In the past, military actions against long-standing insurgencies have resulted in protracted wars with no apparent end in sight. Despite years of counterinsurgency attempts and large military expenditures, U.S. forces in both Iraq and Afghanistan had difficulty breaking up insurgent networks. A quick and clear triumph is improbable since Hamas, like other asymmetric warfare groups, has spent decades developing vast networks of underground tunnels and guerilla warfare techniques.
The potential for a protracted occupation combined with opposition from the local populace may result in an expensive conflict with no obvious conclusion in sight. The United States should prioritize diplomacy, economic growth, and a fair settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict above waging another expensive and dangerous war.
