A bully?

Or the United States of America?

And when the stronger side starts advocating forced dispossession and exile for the weaker side, what would call that?

Bullying again?

Or ethnic cleansing?

To hear the leader of the most powerful country on Earth openly talk about moving Palestinians out of the Gaza Strip so that the US can “take over” and build “the Riviera of the Middle East” is rightly setting alarm bells off in capitals across the world.

It would be one thing if the people of Gaza had asked for an American protectorate, it’s another thing entirely for America to proclaim its wish to take their land.

Notably, he did not say Gaza would be rebuilt for its residents, but that it would be for all peoples, including Palestinians.

There is a brutish naiveite in some of his words, where he questions why the Palestinians wouldn’t want to live somewhere they aren’t being killed. 

The point he is wilfully missing is that they should be allowed to live in the place they already call home without fear of death.

He has floated the idea of Egypt and Jordan, and just weeks ago one of his envoys had suggested the Gazans could be sent to Indonesia. You will not be surprised to learn that none of these countries had been consulted ahead of time.

That Trump thinks forced exile will bring about some sort of stability or peace in the Middle East is folly, possibly wilful folly and also quite possibly ignorance based on not thinking beyond real estate development.

Israel has a right to exist, and the Israeli people have a right to live peacefully like everybody else, but one cannot in good conscience say that more population transfers will make things more as opposed to less stable.

The Palestinians have been scattered for decades, with more Palestinians living in Jordan (more than 3m) than Gaza (2m). 

Another 3m or so live in the West Bank and 2m Arabs, most of them Palestinians, live in Israel. 

To say they are all having a wonderful time is an exercise in fantasy, as those living in the West Bank alone will tell you.

It is peculiar, to say the least, that the United States is simultaneously pursuing policies of withdrawal (for instance, the shuttering of USAid and recall of its staff) and colonial expansion. 

So far it has made noises about absorbing or annexing Canada, Greenland, Panama (or at least its canal), and now Gaza, albeit seemingly without its people.

Quite where all of this will end is unknown. 

So far there has been no substantive or organised resistance domestically, which would be expected to put some sort of guardrails around the regime and, by extension, somewhat limit the damage it is doing internationally.

All of this feeds into his administration’s “shock and awe” tactics, which to date seem largely focused on breaking as many things as possible in as many places to disrupt meaningful opposition. 

That the Democrats are struggling to mount any real resistance speaks as much to the success of Trumpian tactics as it does the party’s listlessness after losing the race for the White House, though it still has great wells of talent to draw on.

In another time, Elon Musk would be the subject of court injunctions rather than pontificating that anybody who opposes him or Trump is a criminal. 

The feeling, as reported by the Washington Post, is that Trump is happy for the Tesla owner to “do the dirty work”. 

However, as anybody who watched the previous administration will know, you only survive in Trump’s orbit as long as you’re useful.

It is somewhat heartening that Democrat politicians Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries are going to subpoena Musk to appear before Congress and the Senate, where he will have to testify under oath. 

This is foundational to the democratic process, and one would expect Democrats to be put under the same scrutiny if they were in power. Checks and balances on any sort of authority are essential protections, even if Trump himself seems more inclined to lean toward executive power trumping legislature.

He has never learned that running a country is not the same as running a business, and seems oblivious to the common notion that once you lose goodwill it is very difficult, and often impossible to win it back. 

“Goodwill” in this case extends to the whole world — even countries that have a favourable view of him generally, such as India, are now suddenly facing the repatriation of their immigrants and meaty tariffs on their exports.

It is baffling, though given his track record not surprising, that a man who wrote about “the art of the deal” has proven so poor at making them. He isn’t even attempting to broker a deal with Palestinians in Gaza, just trying to impose his will, with predictable resistance.

Canada and Mexico called his bluff on tariffs and he backed down after they promised to do things they had promised the Biden administration.

China has called his bluff on tariffs and is digging in. Remember, the last time Trump slapped tariffs on China most of the money raised went on bailing out the American farmers who faced financial ruin after China put retaliatory tariffs on their soyabeans, among other crops.

Whether America or the world will still be in a salvageable place at that point, though, remains to be seen.