Now that we have seen Gazan children parade the bodies of the murdered Bibas boys, many Jews must confront the reality that the leadership of Gaza is indoctrinated with Jew-hatred. The sight of young children, grinning as they hoisted the coffins of murdered Israeli infants like trophies, was a moment of horror that stripped away any lingering illusions about Gaza’s political culture. Released hostages have delivered testimony that they were held not by Hamas militants, but by ordinary families and in apartments with children. The barbarians who kidnapped the Bibas family were not Hamas militants, but citizens in polo shirts who invaded through a breach in the border. For too long, American and European policymakers have refused to take Palestinians at their word, instead imposing their own narratives to excuse and obscure the reality: generation after generation has been raised with the explicit goal of eradicating the Jewish state. The West’s refusal to hold them accountable—its insistence on treating them as helpless victims rather than as agents responsible for their own choices—has only enabled the perpetuation of this hatred. If there is ever to be a different future, it must begin with demanding one.
For decades, the Israel-Palestine conflict has been the modern world’s Gordian Knot: a seemingly intractable tangle of geopolitics, tribalism, and failed diplomacy. But on February 4th, 2025, President Donald Trump swung a sword where others had tried to pull at the threads. While standing beside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he shocked the world by announcing that the U.S. would “take over” the Gaza Strip. Whether Trump’s ambitious plan is merely a bargaining chip with Arab nations or a serious effort to build the next ‘Mar-a-Gaza,’ for the sake of this piece, we will examine the implications of American intervention in the Gaza Strip.
Once Hamas was elected into Gaza in 2006, this once-thriving coastal region became a hub for terrorism. Aid which was intended to support Gazan civilians, was instead diverted by Hamas and Islamic Jihad s to build missiles and tunnels, while lining their own pockets. In fact, Yahya Sinwar, the former leader of Hamas in Gaza who orchestrated the October 7th attacks, died with a net worth of three billion. Humanitarian aid meant to help suffering civilians has been diverted at every turn. Even basic humanitarian resources have been weaponized: water pipes intended to provide clean drinking water have instead been repurposed to manufacture rockets. Despite receiving billions of dollars in aid from the international community, suffering civilians remain trapped in a system where aid is stolen and redirected towards terror, proving that Hamas has no interest in bringing peace to the region.
As long as Hamas is in power, Palestinian civilians will remain trapped in a regime that cultivates terrorism at the expense of their prosperity. If the United States were to intervene in the Gaza Strip, we could witness true prosperity in Gaza. Palestinians would not only gain employment in rebuilding their homeland, but once Gaza becomes livable again, the United States could implement the same standards of education, healthcare, and security we enjoy in America. This would mean Palestinian children would receive a balanced education, rather than being subjected to propaganda and misinformation that fosters hatred toward their Israeli neighbors, as has been the case in UNRWA schools. Housing and infrastructure would be properly maintained, unlike the neglected buildings that have seen little to no upkeep since Hamas’ takeover. If Palestinians chose to collaborate with the U.S. in reconstructing their devastated home, Gaza could become a beacon of hope, instead of a ravaged region.
Of course, the temporary removal of Palestinians is a rightfully delicate issue. Any considerations of Trump’s plan must confront the reality that forcibly removing Gaza’s residents would be both morally and legally complex. However, it is also important to recognize that Trump has a history of using hyperbolic rhetoric as a negotiation tool, often making sweeping statements to stake out an extreme position before settling on a more pragmatic solution.
Feasibility aside, it’s understandable why many Palestinians would be angered by the end of Hamas rule in Gaza. But the reality is that Hamas was elected by Gazans, and many have celebrated the October 7th massacre and aligned with the goals of Hamas. For the last two decades, we have seen repeated evidence that the rule of Hamas does not foster stability or self-sufficiency. Any Gazans who deviate from Hamas’s fundamentalist doctrine have little recourse, as free speech is brutally suppressed, and those deemed political adversaries are often subjected to torture.
Despite Hamas’s iron grip, Western policymakers continue to absolve the broader Palestinian public of responsibility for their leadership. As Einat Wilf, articulated, “Somehow, the idea that Palestinians … know what they are fighting for, that they have clearly articulated goals [being the complete destruction of the Jewish state and its residents] that they are singularly pursuing with tenacity, seems to be a step too far.”
There is a reason no one is proposing a U.S. intervention in the West Bank: despite its flaws, the Palestinian Authority has maintained a degree of diplomacy and order since the Gaza–Jericho Agreement in 1994. In contrast, Hamas has led Gaza into war, economic collapse, and famine. We must acknowledge that continued self-rule under Hamas has only perpetuated suffering. If Gaza is ever to become a place of prosperity, security, and opportunity, we must stop infantilizing Gazans and start taking them at their word when they say that they will not co-exist with a Jewish state. Perhaps, for now, that means American leadership stepping in to restore order and rebuild what Hamas has destroyed.
Beyond the moral complexities, many Americans view President Trump’s proposal to take over the Gaza Strip with apprehension, particularly concerning the potential financial burden. However, due to Gaza’s strategic location on the Mediterranean Sea and recently discovered Marine fields which hold 1.6 trillion cubic feet in recoverable natural gas resources, the financial opportunity outweighs the risk.
Our greatest rival, China, is actively expanding its global influence with a clear and long-term strategy—what Michael Pillsbury refers to in The 100-Year Marathon as China’s goal to surpass the U.S. as the world’s dominant power by 2049. While China seeks to reshape the global order for its benefit, the U.S. is being criticized for considering a limited, temporary solution in Gaza that aims to foster stability and economic development. A U.S. military presence in Gaza could serve as both a stabilizing force and a deterrent to hostile actors such as Iran and Yemen, reinforcing American influence and securing the safety of its closest ally in the Middle East: Israel. This approach would bring enforceability to the Pax Americana that the U.S. has largely enjoyed since World War II in the face of China’s rising expansion.
While the complexities and challenges of Trump’s plan are undeniable, it presents an opportunity for the United States to lead in restoring stability and prosperity to Gaza. By confronting Hamas’s hold on the region and rebuilding Gaza from the ground up, the U.S. could offer a new future for Palestinians, free from the grips of terror and deprivation. Though the path is fraught with moral and logistical challenges, the potential for lasting peace and security in the region could be worth the risk.
Cover Image: View of Gaza Strip from Israel by David Berkowitz, via Wikimedia Commons
The views expressed in this post reflect the views of the author(s) and not UCLA or ASUCLA Communications Board.
