Can Trump Really 'Take Over' Gaza And Expel Its Palestinians?

All other states also have an obligation not to assist an occupying power in violating international humanitarian law. So that means if the US wanted to move the population of Gaza by force, Israel could not assist in this action. And, likewise, the US cannot assist Israel in violating the rules.

Occupying powers are allowed to remove a population for the reason of safety.

Trump and his Middle East envoy, who visited Gaza last week, have repeatedly referenced how dangerous it is. Trump questioned how people could“want to stay” there, saying they have“no alternative” but to leave.

However, removing people for this reason has to only be temporary. Once it's fine for someone to return, they must be returned.

Transferring a population has to be consensual. But in this specific case, it would mean the consent of all Palestinians in Gaza. The US could not force anyone to move who does not want to.

Further to this, a government, such as the Palestinian Authority, cannot give this consent on behalf of a people. People have a right to self-determination – the right to determine their own future.

A perfect example is migration – if a person migrates from one state to another, that is their right. It's not displacement. But forcefully displacing them is not permitted.

And using what sounds like a threat would arguably not be consensual, either. This could be saying, for instance,“If you stay, you'll die because there's only going to be more war. But if you leave, there's peace.” This is the threat of force.

Ethnic cleansing has not been defined in any treaty or convention.

However, most international law experts rely on the definition in the Commission of Experts report on the former state of Yugoslavia to the UN Security Council in 1994. It defined ethnic cleansing as:

So, under that definition, what is being suggested by Trump could be classified as ethnic cleansing – removing the Palestinian people from a certain geographical area through force or intimidation.

If Trump follows through with this plan, it would be a violation of what is known as jus cogens, or the paramount, foundational rules that underpin international law.

And international law dictates that no country is allowed to cooperate with another in violating these rules and all countries must try to stop or prevent any potential violations. This could include placing sanctions on a country or not providing support to that country, for example, by selling it weapons.

A perfect example of this is when Russia illegally annexed Crimea in 2014; very few countries recognized the move. Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 was then followed by sanctions and the freezing of Russian assets , among other actions.

If Trump pursued this course of action, he too could be personally liable under international criminal law if he's the one instigating the forcible transfer of a population.

Sign up for one of our free newsletters

• The Daily Report Start your day right with Asia Times' top stories
• AT Weekly Report A weekly roundup of Asia Times' most-read stories

The International Criminal Court has already issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the former Israeli defense minister and a Hamas commander in relation to the conflict.

The risk of this kind of language

One of the dangers of this kind of rhetoric is the potential to dehumanize the enemy, or the other side.

Trump does this through statements such as,“You look over the decades, it's all death in Gaza”, and resettling people in“nice homes where they can be happy” instead of being“knifed to death .” This language implies the situation in Gaza is due to the“uncivilized” nature of the population.

The risk at the moment, even if Trump doesn't do what he says, is that the mere vocalization of his proposal is dehumanizing to the Palestinian people. And this, in turn, could lead to more violations of the rules of war and international humanitarian law.

The nonchalant way Trump is discussing things such as taking over a territory and moving a population gives the impression these rules can easily be broken, even if he doesn't break them himself.

Tamer Morris is senior lecturer, international law, University of Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article .

Sign up here to comment on Asia Times stories Or Sign in to an existing accoun

Thank you for registering!

An account was already registered with this email. Please check your inbox for an authentication link.

• Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)