Mad President and Street Brawl

By Dr Khairi Janbek

People from my generation remember a pop group which used to sing a song called the lunatics have taken over the asylum. Now, they were not themselves lunatics but merely performing for their audience and their fans, in the same manner. Neither Trump nor his band wagon are necessarily a bunch of thugs, but they are merely performing for their fans and audience.

However one cannot find any reason for world leaders to go to the Oval Office in order to provide US president Donald Trump with the material to entertain his fans and audience.

He ambushed King Abdullah of Jordan with the entry of journalists when that was not supposed to happen in order to market his absurd Gaza plan, president Emmanuel Macron of France provided him with the opportunity of posturing as an antagonist to the EU, prime minister Keir Starmer provided him with the opportunity of showing what Britain was groveling for – a free trade agreement and a role of being a bridge between the US and EU.

Ironically however, the worst of the Trump performance was left for Volodymr Zelensky, though his trip was the only one that made sense.

Zelensky for all intents and purposes, went to sign an agreement to hand the resources of Ukraine to America, but suddenly the situation deteriorated to almost a street brawl. Why? The whole thing was agreed upon by both sides from the start.

Of course, Zelensky expected a protection commitment from the USA in exchange for the mineral resources, but in fairness, without an explicit US commitment protection would have been implicitly there since supposedly, American companies and workers would be working in Ukraine, so what has actually happened to derail the whole agreement?

Of course, any such agreement with potential implicit US protection of Ukraine, is totally against Russian interests, especially according to some speculation, Putin has the intention to occupy the whole of Ukraine, therefore the talk in the corridors, is that Putin has offered Trump the exploitation of Ukrainian resources in the occupied territories of Russia, which in effect sabotaged the minerals agreement between US and Ukraine, and rescued Trump from having to give security guarantees; albeit implicit to Ukraine.

Now, at the peril of repeating the usual cliche of the EU facing a crossroad on its path, something which had happened frequently, this time it’s in fact different. The truth is that the US has been distancing itself from the EU at least from the days of president Obama, but the difference now is that the EU is being attacked by both the US and Russia, and finds itself as the large leviathan with clay feet unable to move.

The dilemma of differences within the EU are prominent, with full support for Ukraine, with some having lukewarm support, while some with no support at all, moreover the NATO future is hanging in the balance, to keep or not to keep that is the question, but what is the alternative? A European army which is yet to crystallize as an idea, or just drop all the effort?

What it boils down to now, is the idea of leadership of the “Free World”, certainly this notion has always been a nebulous idea, still, the US stood by it and projected its image accordingly, but now, it seems the US is not interested in world affairs except in what it can exploit and use and abuse for its own interests, which means, who will be the new leader of the Free World?

In fact, is there a need for a leader of the free world assuming that there is such a world? If the EU has any such pretensions, then big changes are necessary within its membership as it must be realized the road is very long for such an objective. But in the mean time, we have to settle for the theory of the mad president, ie. Trump would do anything, and peace by force with an oxymoron.

Dr Janbek is a Jordanian writer based in Paris.

Continue reading
World Condemn Trump’s Plan Over Gaza

US President Donald Trump’s recent proposal to relocate Palestinians from Gaza and place the territory under long-term US control has sparked widespread international backlash.

Unveiled during a joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the plan envisions transforming Gaza into the “Riviera of the Middle East” by resettling Palestinians in neighboring countries like Jordan and Egypt.

While the proposal received support from Israel, the global response has been overwhelmingly negative, with strong condemnations from major powers, regional countries, and even US lawmakers.

Global powers reject forced relocation

Both Russia and China criticized the plan, highlighting the violation of international norms.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov reaffirmed Russia’s support for a two-state solution, while the Russian Foreign Ministry said: “Any populist comments are counter-productive and ramp up tensions.”

China condemned the forced displacement, emphasizing that “Palestinians governing Palestine” is fundamental for post-conflict stability.

European countries have also been vocal on the plan, expressing strong opposition.

German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock labeled the proposal a breach of international law, stressing that Gaza belongs to the Palestinians.

France reiterated its opposition to any forced displacement, calling it a serious violation of international law.

The UK, under Prime Minister Keir Starmer, supported Palestinian rights to return and rebuild, while Denmark said: “It doesn’t seem to be a realistic way forward.”

Reasserting Italy’s support for the two-state solution, the Italian foreign minister said nothing can be achieved without the Palestinians, noting: “It seems to me that it is a bit difficult (to implement the plan).”

Spain, Ireland, and Slovenia, having recognized Palestine in 2024, condemned the plan, calling it ignorant of Palestinian history and contradiction of the UN Security Council resolutions.

Belgium said forced displacement of populations constitutes “a grave breach of international humanitarian law” while Poland expressed support for a two-state solution.

Canada, where Trump put tariffs on hold last week, said its longstanding position on Gaza has not changed and is committed to achieving a two-state solution.

Relocation plan ‘unacceptable’

Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan condemned the plan as “unacceptable,” stressing that even considering such a proposal is wrong. The Turkish Defense Ministry declared its complete opposition to the displacement of Palestinians.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas rejected the plan outright, stating peace cannot be attained without a Palestinian state.

Hamas group called it “hostile,” while Qatar, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia warned it would destabilize the region.

Iran also voiced firm opposition to the plan, and Iraq condemned the plan to displace Palestinians.

Although Latin American countries were largely silent, Brazil’s President Lula da Silva criticized the proposal as “incomprehensible,” questioning where displaced Palestinians would live.

Dissent within US

Despite originating in Washington, the plan faced criticism even from US lawmakers.

Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen condemned it as “ethnic cleansing by another name.” Representative Rashida Tlaib, a Palestinian-American, declared: “Palestinians aren’t going anywhere.”

Even Republican figures like Senator Lindsey Graham found the proposal “problematic,” while Senator Tim Kaine labeled it “deranged.”

Trump’s Gaza relocation plan has united a broad spectrum of global opposition, transcending geopolitical divides.

While no country has openly expressed support for the plan, many countries have remained silent. Argentina, Japan, and India, the countries that sent representatives to Trump’s inauguration, have not made any statements on the issue.

Countries that want to maintain good relations with the new US administration have also remained silent. Latin American countries, where Trump has cracked down on immigration and drugs after taking the office, have so far kept mum.

Aside from Israel, the international community remains steadfast in rejecting forced displacement, advocating instead for a two-state solution as the only viable path to lasting peace in the region according to Anadolu.

Continue reading
Europe Says No to Trump’s Plan to Take Over Gaza, Transfer its People

Several European leaders, Wednesday, rejected US President Donald Trump’s controversial plan to “take over” Gaza and forcibly resettle its Palestinian population in other countries.

Germany

Dismissing the proposal, German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock said that the only way forward for peace is a negotiated two-state solution.


“It is clear that Gaza—like the West Bank and East Jerusalem—belongs to the Palestinians,” Baerbock said, warning that forcibly expelling the civilian population would violate international law and fuel further hatred.

She stressed that the UN, EU, and G7 have consistently opposed Israeli settlements on Palestinian territories.

France

France also swiftly rejected Trump’s proposal, reaffirming that Gaza should remain part of a future Palestinian state.


“The future of Gaza must be inscribed not in the perspective of control by a third State but in the framework of a future Palestinian State, under the aegis of the Palestinian Authority,” a French Foreign Ministry statement said.

“France reiterates its opposition to any forced displacement of the Palestinian population of Gaza, which would constitute a serious violation of international law, an attack on the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinians, but also a major obstacle to the two-state solution,” it added.


Britain

Responding to a question on Trump’s Gaza remark, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Palestinians in Gaza “must be allowed home, they must be allowed to rebuild, and we should be with them in that rebuild on the way to a two-state solution”


Spain

Spain also joined the chorus of disapproval, with Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares firmly rejecting the idea of US control over Gaza.

“Gaza is the land of the Palestinian Gazans. The Palestinian Gazans must stay in Gaza,” Albares said.

Spain reaffirmed its commitment to a future Palestinian state that includes Gaza as part of its territory.


Poland

Poland’s Deputy Foreign Minister Andrzej Szejna expressed support for a two-state solution and emphasized the need for Palestinian involvement in the peace process.

“Just like in the case of Ukraine, where we say that you can’t decide about Ukraine without Ukraine, if we’re talking about the peace process. Similarly, you can’t decide about Palestine without the Palestinians. This is Poland’s position,” Szejna said.

Slovenia

Slovenian Foreign Minister Tanja Fajon criticized Trump’s comments as reflective of a “deep ignorance of Palestinian history.”


Speaking from Lebanon, Fajon warned that such proposals could lead to further unrest and violence and stressed that Palestinians completely reject the idea of being displaced from their homeland.


Scotland

Scottish First Minister John Swinney also condemned the proposal, calling any suggestion of displacing Palestinians “unacceptable and dangerous.”

Swinney emphasized that the suffering of the people in Gaza must not be exacerbated by plans for forced relocation, following months of intense violence and loss of life in the region.

Further reaction

The Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) condemned Trump’s remarks, describing them as “illegal” and part of a “grotesque plan” that would lead to the mass ethnic cleansing of 2.3 million Palestinians.

“This is a blueprint for a crime of historic proportions,” said the PSC, highlighting that the plan would violate the Geneva Convention’s prohibition on the forcible transfer of populations.

The Muslim Council of Britain has criticized Trump’s plan, urging international action for Gaza’s reconstruction that is led by the Palestinian people themselves.

Wajid Akhter, Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain, warned that any attempt to reconstruct Gaza through displacement would amount to ethnic cleansing.

“Reconstruction without displacement is not only possible – it is the only acceptable path forward,” he stated.

Amnesty Denmark

Amnesty Denmark echoed the widespread rejection, with spokesperson Vibe Klarup drawing a stark comparison between Trump’s plan and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

” (What) Trump is advocating here is, first of all, a real invasion of another people’s country,” Klarup said, adding that any US takeover of Gaza would be criminal and a grave breach of international law.

During a news conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington on Tuesday, Trump said that the US “will take over” Gaza after relocating Palestinians elsewhere under a redevelopment plan that he claimed could turn the enclave into “the Riviera of the Middle East,” according to Anadolu.

Continue reading
UK Sanctions…

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said he is “looking at” sanctioning Israel’s finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, as well as the national security minister, Itamar Ben Gvir.

The sanctions come in response to Smotrich’s remarks that “starving two million people in Gaza might be justified and moral,” while Ben Gvir described settlers who killed a 19-year-old in the West Bank as “heroes.”

Continue reading