In its editorial, The Guardian warned former U.S. allies against normalizing or legitimizing Trump’s transactional approach to international deals, calling it a blatant departure from the rule of law.
The newspaper stated that there is no logical basis to Trump’s idea that Gaza should fall under U.S. control. However, the current White House administration dismisses traditional methods of governance and seeks to radically reshape the world, making it nearly impossible to revert to the pre-Trump era.
The editorial emphasized that “the absurdity of Mr. Trump’s proposal for the U.S. to take over Gaza does not lessen its sinister nature. Forcing 2.2 million Palestinians to flee and settle in neighboring Arab states is undeniably a grave criminal act—ethnic cleansing.”
A Radical Shift in International Norms
According to international laws and norms, there is no justification for Trump’s assertion that Gaza should be under U.S. administration. However, his administration’s disdain for traditional diplomacy is evident in its aggressive attempts to reshape global politics in an irreversible way.
The notion that the U.S. government would seize Gaza and transform it into a Mediterranean Riviera is deeply unsettling. Trump treats one of the world’s most complex conflict zones as if it were a neglected real estate asset in Manhattan. He plays recklessly with the lives of millions, employing the rhetoric of a corrupt property dealer and the tactics of a mafia boss.
This brutal and simplistic approach to international affairs fuels fear, uncertainty, and instability. It also creates unnecessary volatility at a time when a delicate ceasefire in Gaza demands careful diplomacy and restraint.
Global Opposition to Trump’s Intervention
Aside from Israel’s far-right coalition under Benjamin Netanyahu, no Middle Eastern government welcomes Trump’s proposed intervention, viewing it as dangerous and harmful. Even among the U.S.’s European allies—nations that, until recently, considered themselves America’s strategic partners—there is growing disillusionment with Trump’s disregard for international cooperation.
Trump sees the world as a marketplace where individuals are either customers, competitors, or adversaries. Loyalty is transactional, bought with flattery or sacrifices, rather than built on shared interests, legally binding treaties, or democratic values. This shift in American diplomacy has fundamentally altered global geopolitics.
Strengthening Russia and China’s Influence
Trump’s approach inadvertently emboldens Russia and China. By discarding long-standing diplomatic norms, he legitimizes the notion that “might makes right.” This, in turn, justifies Vladimir Putin’s imperialist land grabs in Ukraine and allows China to exploit global distrust in the U.S. for economic and strategic expansion.
China sees this era of U.S. uncertainty as an opportunity to solidify its status as the world’s most stable and strategic superpower. By contrast, the U.S. under Trump increasingly appears erratic and unreliable.
Trump’s Reckless Negotiation Style
A common rationalization for Trump’s behavior is that his extreme rhetoric is merely a negotiation tactic. His most radical proposals—such as the U.S. seizing control of Gaza—are often dismissed as theatrical opening bids meant to disorient his opponents before he ultimately settles on a more moderate outcome.
Yet, this analysis is increasingly naive. While Trump may see himself as a master dealmaker, in reality, his tactics amount to coercion and extortion.
A Warning for Former U.S. Allies
History is full of leaders whose impulsive actions sowed chaos at home and abroad. However, there is no precedent for such behavior from the most powerful democracy in the world. Nor is there a clear guide for America’s former allies on how to navigate this unprecedented situation.
One thing is now certain: hoping that Trump’s America will be persuaded to follow the old rules through diplomacy and appeasement is not a safe strategy.
