“Cutting aid to Palestine becomes a classic case study in why Trump infuriates some while also gains support through what is seen as decisive leadership to others.”
President Trump announced this week that he is cutting aid to Palestine by half. He is now offering $60 million to the UN relief agency, and is holding an additional $65 million in consideration. Predictably, the announcement is drawing outrage from liberals for cutting much needed aid to refugees. But this shows how Trump is using money as leverage to affect meaningful change, in contrast to many liberals that enjoy talking but have little to show for it.
Currently, the Palestinian leadership is split between the Hamas led Gaza strip, and the Palestinian Authority led West Bank. Neither of those sides agrees on much, except that Israelis are awful. They continue to support payments to the families of suicide bombers, and even threatened to withdraw their recognition of Israel. After Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, the Palestinian territory witnessed massive riots, and the UN overwhelmingly voted 128 to 9 in rejection of the measure.
U.S. ambassador Nikki Halley advocated removing all of the funding to Palestine because of their anti-Israeli bias. The $60 million authorized by Trump allows the UN relief agency to operate at minimal function, but still sends the message that he needs. As with the recognition of Jerusalem, Trump showed decisive leadership.
While helping refugees is important, American aid has been taken for granted by those around the world for far too long, and Trump is right to use that aid as leverage to affect change.
It was only several weeks from the time he threatened funding to actually removing the funding. This has a strong chance of producing real change such as lessening Palestinian commitment to terrorism, and increasing their engagement in the peace talks. It shows the UN and countries receiving American aid that they don’t have a right to tax payer money.
While helping refugees is important, American aid has been taken for granted by those around the world for far too long, and Trump is right to use that aid as leverage to affect change. The Palestinians only have themselves to blame for wanting to have it both ways. They seek aid from America while they pursue a violent agenda against an American ally, and seek to actively resist American policy.
It also contrasts with the endless talking of elites. The BBC or New York Times manages to write articles on a daily basis that breathlessly reports every nuance of the discussions, yet they are reporting on non-events. Brexit talks have been ongoing for over a year with little to show for it and a hard dead line arriving.
Cutting aid to Palestine becomes a classic case study in why Trump infuriates some while also gains support through what is seen as decisive leadership to others. Cutting aid to refugees sounds awful on its face. But instead of endless negotiations with a duplicitous partner, Trump relied on action, saved the American taxpayer’s money, and used those savings as leverage to enhance the American agenda.
