The U.S. said it was constructing a floating pier off Gaza’s coast to deliver humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza. However, the real reason it exists is to protect American interests in the region.
The Trident, a U.S.-built “floating pier” off Gaza’s coast that is expected to deliver over 150 trucks’ worth of humanitarian aid into Gaza once fully operational, has been out of service for weeks. The port has received damage to its infrastructure in unclear weather-related circumstances, and on June 15 U.S. Central Command released a statement saying that “the temporary pier will be removed from its anchored position in Gaza and towed back to Ashdod, Israel” due to expected high seas.
“The decision to temporarily relocate the pier is not made lightly but is necessary to ensure the temporary pier can continue to deliver aid in the future,” the statement read.
Despite this, the floating pier appears to have served as a joint command center for both Israeli and U.S. forces during the invasion and massacre at Nuseirat refugee camp on June 8, which saw the retrieval of four Israeli captives.
The damage that rendered the Trident unusable ostensibly resulted from heavy waves that affected parts of the port and four U.S. Navy ships, according to U.S. Central Command. On the ground, Palestinians believe that resistance groups have targeted the U.S. port with mortar shells, but no resistance faction in Gaza has claimed responsibility for any attack against the port. No other news has emerged to corroborate the speculation either.
But one thing is becoming clearer. The Trident appears to be used to facilitate the Israeli army’s invasions throughout Gaza. Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in Palestine, said that Israel “perfidiously” used aid trucks as cover during the Nuseirat invasion, calling it “‘humanitarian camouflage’ at another level.”
Under international law, perfidy, or the “feigning of civilian or non-combatant status,” is considered a war crime.
Several Palestinian factions rejected the presence of the American port on Gaza’s shores, while at the popular level, activists mocked the port and circulated pictures of armored U.S. Hummer-type vehicles at the pier. Some sarcastically commented that these armored Jeeps must be there to protect canned beans, sauce, and food supplies.
The government media office in the Gaza Strip issued a press statement about the American port, which officially entered operation on May 17 before the weather rendered it unusable. The statement said that the U.S. administration was trying to beautify its ugly face and appear civilized by establishing a pier for the delivery of humanitarian aid.
“The U.S. says the goal is to bring humanitarian aid and food to our Palestinian people in the Strip, who are exposed to policies of starvation, forced displacement, and genocide carried out by the Israeli army with the participation, involvement, and blessings of the American administration,” the statement said.
The statement questioned the intentions of the American administration, asserting that the Trident does not come close to covering the need of the Palestinian people for food in Gaza.
“The port will not break the famine,” it said. “Instead, it will allow the Israeli occupation to prolong this war, which has devoured everything.”
When the construction of the port was first announced back in March, the U.S. promised that American forces would not enter the Gaza Strip. Biden said there would be “no boots on the ground,” and the U.S. military’s presence would only be to facilitate delivery. The aid would reach Cyprus by air or by sea, where it would be strictly inspected by Cypriot customs officials, Israeli and American crews, and United Nations representatives, before being loaded onto commercial ships and sailing 320 kilometers to the Trident.
United Nations relief organizations would then receive and distribute the aid to their facilities near the Gaza coast. After the first batch of food was delivered through the American port in May, the United Nations World Food Program assumed responsibility for distributing aid inside the Strip. The WFP’s activities, however, have not been suspended due to concerns for the safety of its teams.
This costly and complex logistical operation was conceived by the U.S. administration as a workaround for Israel’s policy of starvation and systematic blocking of aid through Gaza’s usual land crossings, which are far more efficient and cost-effective.
The UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said Gaza should not depend on a costly floating dock that is easily damaged by sea conditions. OCHA stressed that land routes remained the most feasible means of delivering aid to the people of Gaza.
A port soaked in blood
During the ongoing genocidal war, the Israeli army destroyed entire cities. Over 80% of Gaza City was leveled. Other parts of northern Gaza and Khan Younis were also heavily hit, and continue to be. With over 13,000 missing people in Gaza, still stuck under the rubble, Palestinians say the floating port, which the Israeli army filled with the ruins of destroyed houses in the Gaza Strip, means that the humanitarian aid passes over a port drenched in blood.
When Biden first announced the pier, the Israeli army began collecting the rubble of homes in the Gaza Strip and placing it in the port construction area so that the ruins would be a bridge for the arrival of American aid trucks.
Political analyst and writer Nasser Eliwa raises an essential question regarding the American port: what is America’s endgame?
“Gaza today represents a high concentration [of interests] for the American administration in the context of the future conflict over power,” Eliwa told Mondoweiss. “The U.S. sees Gaza as the last stage in a line of communication that stretches between India, Asia, and the Arabian Gulf to the Mediterranean Sea. It is a port and a place to collect, re-export, and rehabilitate gas for Europe. It is also a reserve port for its fleets and aircraft carriers.”
“This is what the U.S. wants,” Eliwa maintains. “It wants a permanent base on the eastern Mediterranean.”
“This is what the U.S. wants,” Eliwa maintains. “It wants a permanent base on the eastern Mediterranean.”
Eliwa explains that three primary goals animate America’s policy toward Gaza. First, it wants to allow Gaza to function as a base for the naval fleets that feed and finance from the port of Haifa, or as an alternative base in the event of a political shift in Israel.
Second, Gaza constitutes a meeting point for gas, whether in the Mediterranean Sea or from what comes from the Gulf to the Mediterranean coast.
“In the gas trade, the security of the gas flowing to Europe is essential,” Eliwa explains. “America will therefore be a guardian of Europe.”
Third, Gaza will be downstream of the Red Sea Canal, which is the route of the Gaza Valley.
“Gaza today is the new land that America occupies openly and clearly, and this port is only the first step in this plan,” Eliwa said.
The American port can therefore be seen as a first milestone in a process of transforming the political geography of the Gaza Strip. Eliwa explains that the floating pier will soon become a giant port, and that it is not unlikely that Arab countries will supervise it in exchange for the reconstruction of Gaza. He explains that the presence of the port would facilitate closing all of Gaza’s crossings, eliminating the civilian population’s reliance on other land crossings.
“Today, aid enters,” Eliwa says. “And some of it may bring in commercial materials, then reconstruction materials, and there may be travel for individuals. These are speculations, but they may seem closest to reality.”
He adds that Gaza now has an independent entry point for the U.S., which can land marine forces, relief, food, and commercial materials into the Gaza Strip.
Earlier this week, Mondoweiss published a report quoting an intelligence source from within the Gaza resistance, which believes that the Trident will eventually be used to facilitate the displacement of Palestinians from Gaza based on humanitarian grounds.
These are fears that are echoed by people in Gaza. Many expect that the port will facilitate the process of displacing people from the Gaza Strip across the sea, which is expected if the war continues and the American port serves as a means of transportation. “If this port provides people with freedom of movement, thousands of people from the Gaza Strip will want to travel and return to trade, study, or visit,” Eliwa said. “If this port continues to exist, it will redefine the Gaza Strip in the geostrategic sense.”
No comments:
Post a Comment