Invaders Behind the Iraq War Are Now After Gaza

Quick Overview

Diana Buttu argues that the Trump administration's peace plan was inherently flawed because it was designed to serve Israeli interests, specifically by excluding Palestinian input and enabling further Israeli control and settlement expansion in Gaza, which she views as a continuation of ethnic cleansing, making it impossible for Palestinians to negotiate for their basic rights.

Key Points: Diana Buttu asserts the Trump peace plan was inherently colonial because it excluded Palestinian input and favored Israeli interests. The plan's structure essentially guaranteed Israeli control and the expansion of settlements, enabling what Buttu terms ethnic cleansing. Buttu notes that 82% of Israelis polled support the plan, but Palestinians—whose homes were destroyed and who remain captive—do not have a say. The plan implies that if both sides agree, the war ends, but Israel retains the power to veto by not withdrawing fully or by continuing settlement activity. Buttu highlights that Israeli military activity, including killing civilians and destroying homes, has continued even after the plan's announcement. She points out that the Oslo Accords, signed in 1993, are still in effect, and the current situation is an escalation of those prior agreements. The ultimate goal of the plan, according to Buttu, is to maintain Israeli control and avoid accountability for actions like the killing of 42-year-old healthcare worker Dr. Omar al-Hek.

Context: Diana Buttu, a lawyer and political analyst who has worked for years in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, discusses the Trump administration's peace proposal, often referred to as the 'Deal of the Century.' She analyzes the plan's structure and its implications for Palestinian self-determination, contrasting its terms with historical agreements like Oslo and recent escalations in violence and settlement expansion.

Detailed Analysis

Diana Buttu critiques the Trump administration's peace plan, stating that its fundamental flaw is that it exclusively serves Israeli interests, effectively institutionalizing Israeli control and allowing for continued denial of Palestinian self-determination. She emphasizes that the plan was devised without any Palestinian input, pointing out that 82% of Israelis polled support it, while Palestinians remain subject to ongoing military actions and occupation. Buttu highlights specific elements of the plan, such as the vague terms regarding a ceasefire contingent on both sides agreeing, and the implied Israeli veto power over withdrawal. She contrasts this with the Oslo Accords, noting that the current situation is an extension of those earlier, unsuccessful frameworks. Buttu criticizes the plan for normalizing the status quo where Palestinians are denied basic rights and accountability for Israeli actions, such as the killing of civilians and the expansion of settlements, which she describes as an ongoing process of ethnic cleansing. She concludes that the plan ultimately aims to ensure Israel maintains control without facing consequences from the international community, symbolized by the failure of the International Criminal Court to act.