Norman Finkelstein, an esteemed and outspoken scholar of the Israel-Palestine conflict, has provided a blistering analysis of President Donald Trump’s recently announced Gaza “peace” plan. He refers to it as the worst version so far. He claims that the plan does not provide a legitimate path to justice for Palestinians. Instead, it withdraws from any involvement entirely.
Trump’s plan called for the establishment of a new “Board of Peace” for Gaza. He himself will personally chair this board as well. Finkelstein contends that this tactic denies the Palestinian people a role in determining their own future. He says it doesn’t go far enough in terms of getting a clear path to statehood.
In a special, in-depth interview with Marc Lamont Hill on what it means for American cities, Finkelstein explained some of his thinking. And third, he reiterated that the plan marks a complete break with any serious conversation about Palestinian rights and aspirations.
“This is the weakest yet with no path to justice.” – Norman Finkelstein
Furthermore, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has expressed his intention to maintain a presence in Gaza, which raises concerns about the feasibility of any peace process emerging from Trump’s proposal. Such a position shows an unwillingness to approach real negotiations that take Palestinian sovereignty seriously.
The international response to Trump’s plan has been divided. Countries, organizations and people around the globe have responded favorably to the initiative. Peace advocates have hailed it as a bold step towards addressing decades-old grievances in the region. Many critics question the efficacy of a plan that bypasses Palestinian leadership and fails to address their fundamental right to statehood.
Finkelstein’s view adds important context to what Trump’s tactics might mean for all of us. Most important, he feels, is including Palestinians in the conversation about their future. Without their active participation, any resolution that gets proposed is simply doomed to be unsustainable and unjust. Quite a few analysts seem to be agreeing with this take. They are convinced that we won’t find true peace if we don’t address the underlying causes of the Israel-Palestine conflict.
As negotiations continue, we hope to learn more about the specific details of how Trump’s peace plan will influence the peace process in Gaza. Will it encourage the right kind of dialogue, or will it just further entrench the divides that exist?
