The process of building a floating port in Gaza may take 60 days, according to American estimates (Reuters)

US President Joe Biden's idea of ​​establishing a seaport in the Gaza Strip raises major questions about the mechanisms for its implementation and the real goals behind it, especially as it comes amidst the worsening suffering of the population due to famine, resulting from the siege imposed on the Strip and the Israeli aggression that has continued for 155 days.

During his State of the Union address at dawn on Friday, Biden said that he had assigned the US army an emergency mission to establish a pier on the Gaza coast under the pretext of delivering large quantities of humanitarian aid.

Immediately, British Foreign Secretary David Cameron announced that his country would cooperate with the United States to open a sea corridor to deliver aid directly to Gaza.

Ambiguity and contradictions

Until now, the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) has not issued any position in this regard, except for statements by the leader Muhammad Nazzal to Al Jazeera Mubasher, during which he said that the proposal “is still ambiguous and raises many questions.”

He continued, saying that the American administration’s proposal to build the seaport at this particular time requires many details about the port’s missions, its management, and the occupation’s position on it. He said that the proposal “contains contradictions that are neither understood, nor justified, nor explained.”

But he added at the same time, "Hamas submitted a request to build a sea port to and from the Gaza Strip in order to avoid the problems we faced at the crossings, and this request was always rejected."

Yesterday, Friday, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Michael Fakhri, denounced the American proposal, and said during a press conference in Geneva that it was “the first time I have heard anyone say that we need to use a sea pier. No one has asked for a sea pier, neither the Palestinian people nor the humanitarian community.” .

Fakhri described the American proposal as “malicious” and came in response to electoral interests, pointing out that the United States is at the same time providing bombs, ammunition, and financial support to Israel.

As for the Jordanian expert in military and strategic affairs, Hisham Khreisat, he said in statements to Al Jazeera that despite the “humanitarian aspect” of what Biden announced, there is another aspect to the floating port related to encouraging voluntary Palestinian migration to Europe, and canceling any role for the Rafah land crossing on the border with Egypt.

Integrated program

On the other hand, observers believe that entering the Gaza situation through humanitarian aid and relieving the population is an integrated program that belongs to an American-Israeli vision and is shared by Arab parties. It is the second stage after severe starvation by imposing an American-sponsored mechanism to address the hunger crisis to neutralize the role of the Hamas movement in the Gaza Strip.

In this regard, writer and political analyst Abdullah Al-Aqrabawi says that if the introduction of food in particular is intensive and organized, "this will not be an easy way to implement their plan to gradually remove the Hamas movement from the equation."

He added in his interview with Al Jazeera Net, “In the issue of hunger, you cannot prevent people from food and you cannot stand in the way of their relief,” but the truth is that this port or sea corridor “is not what the Hamas movement was demanding to break the siege on the Gaza Strip, and the port may constitute The US is a tool to tighten the siege on the Palestinians.”

He continues that the United States will not allow any "presence of the movement and its institutions in the port mechanism, as it is a direct tool for tightening control over people through starvation and then feeding."

Al-Aqrabawi warned against this “occupation port,” saying that if the American army was allowed to enter the borders of Gaza, this would be a very dangerous step.

"It should not be welcomed at all."

It is not a solution to the humanitarian crisis

According to American statements, the sea bridge needs weeks to operate. The US Department of Defense (the Pentagon) announced that the process of building the floating port will take 60 days, and more than a thousand soldiers will likely participate in it, and according to European estimates, it can transport the equivalent of only 200 trucks. Daily".

Writer and political researcher Muhammad Ghazi Al-Jamal believes that the port in this way does not provide half of the sector’s daily needs, and does not constitute a radical solution to the humanitarian crisis, “while the solution lies in exerting sufficient pressure on the occupying state to bring in aid by land in the appropriate amount.”

He said in statements to Al Jazeera Net that the United States fears the repercussions of the deteriorating humanitarian conditions in the Strip, because of its potential impact on its interests and forces in the region and around the world.

He adds that at the strategic level, the human rights file has been an essential tool for the work of American foreign policy and a justification for military interventions and economic sanctions against many countries of the world, and it fears the impact of its silence and complicity with the crimes of the occupation in Gaza on the effectiveness of this strategic tool in its policy in the future, especially in the conflict with China.

On the other hand - the writer adds - the Israeli government does not show sufficient understanding of this American need, and focuses instead on efforts to displace the population of the northern Gaza Strip, negotiating pressure on the resistance using the weapon of starvation, and placing obstacles in the way of the arrival of aid by land, with the aim of undermining the presence of any civil authority. Thus undermining the components of cohesion and resilience in the sector.

He said in the face of this situation, “The American administration finds no alternative to direct intervention to protect its immediate and strategic interests, and it also believes that this is a real interest for the occupying state, even if the Netanyahu government does not value it as much as it does.”

Impact on Rafah

Israel was not far from these arrangements, as the Israeli media quoted a senior Israeli official whose name was not revealed as saying that Tel Aviv supports the establishment of a temporary floating dock to bring humanitarian relief aid to the residents of the Gaza Strip, like the one Biden spoke about.

According to this official, this initiative was discussed between Israel and the United States in the past and they agreed to coordinate its implementation.

The Israeli green light to implement this proposal indicates an Israeli interest in it, especially since it will constitute an alternative to the Rafah crossing and will put it out of service, especially since Israel “does not trust the crossing and considers it the main entrance for Hamas’ weapons.”

He also indicated that Biden is very concerned about what will result from the Israeli army’s invasion of the city of Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip, and about not ending the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, which will be reflected in the outcome of the elections in the United States, so he will accelerate the construction of the port.

The American port’s move will appear as pressure on Egypt by underestimating the importance of the Rafah crossing. Despite all the obstacles that Gaza faces in the Rafah crossing issue, in the end it remains an Arab-Palestinian corridor, not an American one, in addition to the presence of a number of interests and intersections that allow Hamas to manage the relationship with Egypt in Different circumstances.

Source: Al Jazeera