عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Features

Trump’s Gaza Stunner Builds on His Expansionist Aims 

President Donald Trump meets with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office of the White House, Tuesday, Feb. 4, 2025, in Washington. (AP) 
President Donald Trump meets with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office of the White House, Tuesday, Feb. 4, 2025, in Washington. (AP) 
TT
TT

Trump’s Gaza Stunner Builds on His Expansionist Aims 

President Donald Trump meets with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office of the White House, Tuesday, Feb. 4, 2025, in Washington. (AP) 
President Donald Trump meets with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office of the White House, Tuesday, Feb. 4, 2025, in Washington. (AP) 

President Donald Trump’s jaw-dropping statement that he would like the US to take control of and redevelop the Gaza Strip might have sounded like it came from nowhere, but it was in keeping with his new administration’s expansionist ambitions.

Since Trump's return to the White House a little more than two weeks ago, his "America First" approach seems to have morphed into "America More," with the president fixated on acquiring new territory even after campaigning on pledges to keep the nation out of foreign entanglements and "forever wars."

Trump raised the possibility of the US owning Gaza during a Tuesday press conference at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He said he envisioned building a resort where international communities could live in harmony.

The casual proposal sent diplomatic shockwaves across the Middle East and around the globe, but was characteristic of how Trump has approached his second term – treating ties with close allies such as Canada and Mexico as largely transactional relationships and viewing the world as one large business opportunity. That view was underlined by his proposal on Monday to launch a US sovereign wealth fund.

He has raised the possibility of the country taking back the Panama Canal, proposed the US wrest Greenland from Denmark and repeatedly suggested that Canada should be absorbed as the 51st US state. Reuters/Ipsos polling shows little public support for these ideas, even in Trump's Republican Party.

At the same time, he has threatened Canada – along with Mexico – with economic penalties if they don't accede to Trump’s border-security demands.

Trump also raised the prospect of a resettlement of the more than 2 million Palestinians living in Gaza, suggesting it had become uninhabitable after nearly 16 months of war between Israel and Hamas. Human rights advocates deplore such ideas as ethnic cleansing. Any forced displacement would likely violate international law.

At Tuesday’s press conference with Netanyahu, Trump spoke like the real estate developer he once was while acknowledging the hardships the Palestinian residents of Gaza have had to endure.

"You'll make that into an international, unbelievable place. I think the potential and the Gaza Strip is unbelievable," Trump said. "And I think the entire world, representatives from all over the world, will be there, and they'll live there. Palestinians also, Palestinians will live there. Many people will live there."

Trump's son-in-law and former aide, Jared Kushner, last year described Gaza as "valuable" waterfront property.

Netanyahu praised Trump for "thinking outside the box," but neither leader addressed the legality of what Trump was proposing.

But Trump may not be serious about a US stake in Gaza, said Will Wechsler, senior director of Middle East programs at the Atlantic Council. He may be doing what he often does, taking extreme positions as a bargaining strategy, Wechsler said.

"President Trump is following his regular playbook: shift the goalposts to increase his leverage in anticipation of a negotiation to come," Wechsler said. "In this case it’s a negotiation about the future of the Palestinian Authority."

HARD TO SEE A 'HAPPY ENDING'

But Trump’s suggestion would seem to dismiss the idea of a two-state solution in favor of some sort of new paradigm that involves the US perhaps serving as a buffer in the region.

"Wow," said Jon Alterman, a former State Department official who now heads the Middle East program at the Washington Center for Strategic and International Studies. Gazans were unlikely to voluntarily leave the region, he said.

"Many Gazans descended from Palestinians who fled parts of present-day Israel and have never been able to return to their previous homes. I’m skeptical many would be willing to leave even a shattered Gaza," he said. "It's hard to me to imagine a happy ending for a massive redevelopment of a depopulated Gaza."

The Palestinian Hamas movement came to power in Gaza in 2007 after Israeli soldiers and settlers withdrew in 2005, but the enclave is still deemed Israeli-occupied territory by the United Nations. Israel and Egypt control access to Gaza.

The United Nations and the United States have long endorsed a vision of two states living side by side within secure and recognized borders. Palestinians want a state in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip, all territories captured by Israel in the 1967 war with neighboring Arab states.

Dozens of protesters gathered near the White House on Tuesday to protest Netanyahu's visit, with the demonstrations continuing after Trump’s remarks on Gaza were relayed to the crowd. Netanyahu steadfastly opposes a Palestinian state.

"Trump, Bibi belong in jail, Palestine is not for sale," the demonstrators chanted.

As a presidential candidate, Trump largely spoke in isolationist terms about the need to end foreign wars and strengthen borders. He suggested Europe largely take on the cause of Ukraine in its war with Russia rather than the United States.

His early efforts in the White House have largely been focused on deporting migrants in the country illegally and shrinking the size of the federal government – two tenets of his campaign agenda.

Expansionism was not part of his rhetoric and there may be some political risk for Trump and his Republican allies. According to Reuters/Ipsos polling, voters are not on board.

Just 16% of US adults supported the idea of the US pressuring Denmark to sell Greenland in a Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted on Jan. 20-21 following Trump's inauguration. Some 29% supported the idea of retaking control of the Panama Canal.

Just 21% agreed with the idea that the US has the right to expand its territory in the Western Hemisphere and just 9% of respondents, including 15% of Republicans, said the US should use military force to secure new territories.

Most Viewed

 
 
Features

In Finland, Radioactive Spent Nuclear Fuel Soon to Be Buried Underground

Picture taken on May 18, 2026 shows the "hot cell" fuel handling chamber at the encapsulation plant of nuclear waste management company Posiva at the site of what is expected to be the world's first permanent repository for radioactive spent nuclear fuel at the Onkalo nuclear repository in Eurajoki, southwestern Finland. (AFP)
Picture taken on May 18, 2026 shows the "hot cell" fuel handling chamber at the encapsulation plant of nuclear waste management company Posiva at the site of what is expected to be the world's first permanent repository for radioactive spent nuclear fuel at the Onkalo nuclear repository in Eurajoki, southwestern Finland. (AFP)
TT
TT

In Finland, Radioactive Spent Nuclear Fuel Soon to Be Buried Underground

Picture taken on May 18, 2026 shows the "hot cell" fuel handling chamber at the encapsulation plant of nuclear waste management company Posiva at the site of what is expected to be the world's first permanent repository for radioactive spent nuclear fuel at the Onkalo nuclear repository in Eurajoki, southwestern Finland. (AFP)
Picture taken on May 18, 2026 shows the "hot cell" fuel handling chamber at the encapsulation plant of nuclear waste management company Posiva at the site of what is expected to be the world's first permanent repository for radioactive spent nuclear fuel at the Onkalo nuclear repository in Eurajoki, southwestern Finland. (AFP)

The elevator display reads "433", the number of meters below ground. The doors slide open, revealing the entrance to what is expected to be the world's first permanent repository for radioactive spent nuclear fuel.

Blasted into 1.9 billion-year-old stable bedrock in Eurajoki, southwest Finland, the geological repository for spent nuclear waste -- dubbed Onkalo which means "cave" in Finnish -- is nearly ready to start operations.

Countries have been wrestling with what to do with dangerous nuclear by-products since the first plants were built in the 1950s. Currently, most of it is in temporary storage.

Final repositories are being built in other countries, including neighboring Sweden and France, but Finland is expected to be first to open an underground storage solution.

The Finnish Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK) is due to give approval in its final assessment in June, after which an operating license can be granted.

"We hope we can start the operation either at the end of this year or most probably at the beginning of next year," said Philippe Bordarier, chief executive of nuclear operator Teollisuuden Voima Oyj (TVO).

His voice echoed in the damp tunnel where the spent nuclear fuel will be buried in holes drilled into the bedrock, where it will remain harmfully radioactive for thousands of years.

The waste currently cooled in water pools at an interim storage site, at the nearby Olkiluoto power plant next to the Baltic Sea, will be first to be deposited, Bordarier said.

With space for 6,500 tons of uranium, Onkalo is aimed at providing permanent storage for spent fuel from Finland's five nuclear reactors -- three of them located in Olkiluoto.

Nuclear waste management company Posiva began building the site in 2004, with the cost now estimated at one billion euros ($1.16 billion).

- 'Forever'-

Spent fuel is planned to be deposited in Onkalo's massive network of tunnels for 100 years, but operations may be extended if new nuclear reactors are built.

Subsequently, the vault will be sealed to provide safe storage for at least 100,000 years.

"Basically, it needs to be safe forever," noted Lauri Parviainen, a Posiva chemist who showed reporters around the facilities.

The fuel will be highly radioactive for "tens of thousands of years", he said.

After 100,000 years, they will be "about the same level as the uranium ore of which the fuel is made."

Above ground, the spent nuclear fuel will be encapsulated in highly corrosion-resistant copper canisters.

The canisters will be lowered into holes drilled in the tunnels, before the holes are filled with bentonite clay to seal them, Parviainen explained.

"So if the bentonite stays in place, we are safe," he said.

Once each 300-meter-long disposal tunnel is filled, it will be sealed with a steel-reinforced concrete plug.

- Long-term risks -

Jarkko Kyllonen, an expert on nuclear safety at Finland's nuclear regulator STUK, has assessed risk scenarios for the Onkalo project stretching up to a million years into the future.

Considering the "hazard potential of the waste, the first 10,000 years are very important for keeping the capsules intact," he told AFP.

The main long-term risks are corrosion of the copper canisters or earthquakes during future ice ages, which could potentially damage the capsules and cause radioactive fuel to leak, Kyllonen said.

But the results of various risk assessments conducted over the years have been "positive".

While France's plans for a similar underground nuclear tomb have met with strong opposition, Onkalo has received broader backing in Finland.

There was some opposition locally when the plans were first introduced in the 1970s, but "people have gotten used to it, and they trust the assessments made by STUK", Matti Kojo, social sciences professor at Lut University, told AFP.

"At the moment, support for nuclear power is at a historically high level in Finland," he noted.

The Finnish Association for Nature Conservation remains critical of the project, however, insisting that nuclear waste poses a long-term, serious risk.

"No one can guarantee the safety of Onkalo for thousands of years," director Tapani Veistola told AFP in an e-mail.

- Finland's nuclear push -

Under Finnish law, nuclear waste produced in Finland has to be deposited in the country, Climate and Environment Minister Sari Multala told AFP.

"Before the legal change in 1994, the spent nuclear fuel was exported to, for example, Russia," she said.

Increasing nuclear power in Finland has been a priority for the right-wing government, and the country is considering building so-called small modular reactors (SMRs).

How the spent nuclear fuel from future SMRs would be managed "has not been decided yet," Multala said. An assessment should be completed by March next year, she added.

Features

Iran's Strongest Card in Nuclear Talks: Its Highly Enriched Uranium

Centrifuges at the Fordow nuclear facility before the June 2025 attacks (Reuters)
Centrifuges at the Fordow nuclear facility before the June 2025 attacks (Reuters)
TT
TT

Iran's Strongest Card in Nuclear Talks: Its Highly Enriched Uranium

Centrifuges at the Fordow nuclear facility before the June 2025 attacks (Reuters)
Centrifuges at the Fordow nuclear facility before the June 2025 attacks (Reuters)

Iran and the United States are in discussions to extend ‌their ceasefire so as to start negotiations on issues including Tehran's nuclear program, where Washington insists Iran must not be able to make a nuclear weapon.

While much of Iran's uranium enrichment infrastructure was destroyed or badly damaged when Israel and the US bombed it in June, a large part of the highly enriched uranium it amassed is thought to have survived. That is the biggest US concern ahead of nuclear talks.

On Friday Trump said in a social media post that Iran must agree that the enriched uranium buried underground after earlier US strikes be "unearthed" and destroyed in coordination with Iran and the UN nuclear watchdog.

WHAT IS HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM?

One of two fissile materials, along with plutonium, with which one can make the core of a nuclear bomb. While plutonium is usually extracted from the spent fuel of a nuclear reactor, requiring large and highly visible infrastructure, uranium can be enriched using centrifuges that have a much smaller footprint. Two of Iran's three enrichment sites that are known to have been operating when Israel and the ‌US attacked in ‌June were underground. The above-ground one was clearly destroyed.

Uranium is highly enriched when it ‌has ⁠reached 20% purity, and ⁠weapons-grade as of around 90%.

Modern reactors generally use fuel enriched to up to 5%, but some use fuel enriched to higher levels. The ones that power US nuclear submarines reportedly use fuel enriched beyond 90%.

HOW MUCH DOES IRAN HAVE?

Iran has not informed the UN nuclear watchdog of the fate of its enriched uranium since the June attacks or let its inspectors return to the sites where it was stored.

The International Atomic Energy Agency estimates Iran had these amounts when the first Israeli bombs fell on June 13:

- 440.9 kg enriched to up to 60%

- 184.1 kg enriched to up to 20%

- 6,024.4 kg enriched to ⁠up to 5%

- 2,391.1 kg enriched to up to 2%

According to an IAEA yardstick, ‌the amount at 60% is enough, if enriched further, for 10 nuclear weapons. ‌The 20% stock would be enough for one and the 5% could produce 12. How much has survived is unclear. IAEA chief ‌Rafael Grossi has said his agency believes "a bit more than 200 kg" of the 60% stock is stored at a ‌tunnel complex in Isfahan that appears to have been largely unharmed by the June attacks. Some was also at the Natanz nuclear site, he said.

WHY THE CONCERN? US concern has been focused on the 60% material because that would be easiest and thus quickest to make a bomb with. Washington wants it gone. Iran denies seeking nuclear weapons.

As the enrichment level of uranium increases, it becomes exponentially easier to enrich ‌further. Getting from 60% to 90% is easier than getting from unenriched to 5%.

President Donald Trump pulled the United States out of a nuclear deal between Iran and ⁠major powers that kept Tehran ⁠at a far greater distance from being able to produce an atom bomb than it is at now. The US withdrawal in 2018 caused the deal to unravel, and Iran quickly expanded its atomic program.

Under that 2015 deal, Iran did not enrich beyond 3.67%.

Even at 90%, however, it takes more steps to produce the core of a bomb. When it is enriched, the uranium is in gas form. It must then be turned into metal for use in a weapon.

CAN YOU MOVE IT?

Yes. Iran moved enriched material between sites under IAEA monitoring before the June attacks.

Under the 2015 deal and a precursor to it, Iran's stocks of uranium enriched to up to 20% were diluted or turned into reactor fuel plates and shipped out of the country.

Moving nuclear material like highly enriched uranium internationally is a sensitive but relatively routine procedure.

"It requires some precaution but it can be moved," Grossi told PBS in March when asked about the 60% material.

WILL IRAN GIVE IT UP? Iran's supreme leader has issued a directive that the 60% material should not be sent abroad, two senior Iranian sources said last week.

Iranian sources say Tehran might agree to send half of it to a third country, receiving uranium enriched to 5% in return, and dilute the other half inside Iran.

Features

Beaufort Castle: Israel’s Geographic Gateway to South Lebanon

Smoke rises near the Beaufort Castle, as seen from Marjeyoun, southern Lebanon, May 29, 2026. (Reuters)
Smoke rises near the Beaufort Castle, as seen from Marjeyoun, southern Lebanon, May 29, 2026. (Reuters)
TT
TT

Beaufort Castle: Israel’s Geographic Gateway to South Lebanon

Smoke rises near the Beaufort Castle, as seen from Marjeyoun, southern Lebanon, May 29, 2026. (Reuters)
Smoke rises near the Beaufort Castle, as seen from Marjeyoun, southern Lebanon, May 29, 2026. (Reuters)

Repeated Israeli strikes on the medieval Beaufort Castle and its surroundings east of Nabatieh have revived debate over one of southern Lebanon’s most sensitive sites due to its elevated position overlooking Palestinian territories, Syria and Lebanon.

For decades, the Crusader fortress was a commanding military position and a battlefield etched into Israeli and Lebanese memory. Now, as fighting escalates in the south, it is back at the center of events. Military assessments say its battlefield value remains, despite major changes in warfare over recent decades.

The renewed focus on Beaufort Castle comes as Israel intensifies strikes around the site and the heights overlooking Nabatieh. The attacks have raised fresh questions about the military value of a position that has remained present in major confrontations in southern Lebanon since Israel's 1982 invasion.

Heritage landmark

Beaufort Castle, known in Arabic as Qalaat al-Shaqif, is one of southern Lebanon’s most prominent historical and heritage landmarks, and among the most important Crusader castles in the Levant.

The Crusaders named it Beaufort, meaning “beautiful fortress.” It later fell to Salaheddine after a long siege. The Crusaders then retook it for a period, and the Knights Templar inhabited it, before the Mamluks, led by Sultan al-Zahir Baybars, seized it in 1268.

Smoke rises from Beaufort Castle following strikes, as seen from Marjeyoun, southern Lebanon, May 27, 2026. (Reuters)

Although the Romans first built initial fortifications at the strategic site, the Crusaders greatly expanded it and built most of its existing structures.

Since 2024, the castle has held “enhanced protection” status under the Second Protocol to the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, Lebanon's Arnoun municipality said in a statement.

The municipality warned that repeated Israeli strikes could damage the castle and urged Lebanese authorities and relevant international organizations to act to protect the landmark and prevent further harm.

Battlefield advantage

Claiming the castle has long been seen as a battlefield advantage. In the 1970s, it came under heavy Israeli airstrikes after the Palestine Liberation Organization used it as a position to fire at Israel. In 1982, it was the scene of one of the fiercest battles between Israeli forces and Palestinian fighters and their Lebanese allies. Israel occupied it until 2000.

Retired Brigadier General Bassam Yassine said Beaufort Castle’s importance today is little different from the value that made it a focus of battles since the 1982 invasion. The site, he said, remains one of southern Lebanon’s most prominent commanding military positions.

“Beaufort Castle has been present in all wars and battles with Israel from 1982 until today because of its strategic location,” Yassine told Asharq Al-Awsat, saying it offers a commanding view over wide areas of southern Lebanon and northern occupied Palestine.

“Beaufort Castle overlooks the settlement of Metula, which is less than four kilometers away. It overlooks the area between the Litani and Zahrani rivers and is considered the highest hill in this sector,” he said.

The site gives whoever controls it a major military advantage, Yassine said.

“From Beaufort Castle, one can observe Taybeh, Deir Seryan and Qantara, where the Israeli army is present today. That is why it cannot leave it outside its control if it wants to remain in the area where it is deployed,” he said.

Yassine said this importance is not new. Before Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon in 2000, it controlled hills and heights around the area, including Beaufort Castle, to secure battlefield superiority and maintain observation over its surroundings.

Destroyed buildings are pictured in the village of Kfar Kila in southern Lebanon as seen from across the border in the Upper Galilee region of northern Israel on May 29, 2026, with the Crusader-period Beaufort Castle pictured in Lebanon in the background. (AFP)

Asked which sectors the castle exposes, he said: “It directly overlooks Yohmor al-Shaqif, eastern Zawtar, western Zawtar, Kfar Tebnit and Nabatieh al-Fawqa. All these areas are exposed from the castle.”

“It also protects forces on the Yohmor and Zawtar axes, and provides cover for troops deployed in Taybeh, Deir Seryan and Qantara, and across this entire sector,” he added.

Yassine said the castle’s military value also lies in its defensive terrain.

“If any resistance force managed to infiltrate the castle and possess anti-armor missiles there, it would become very difficult to remove it from the site or destroy it because of the geography of the location,” he explained.

He said Israel had faced that problem before, during the period of Palestinian armed presence in the south.

“The Israelis tried many times to destroy the castle during the Palestinian period, but they did not succeed because of its geography,” he said.

Yassine said the site includes old historical passages and tunnels.

“The castle has tunnels that reach the Litani River below. They have existed since the Crusader era and are not newly built tunnels, which gives the site additional defensive value,” he said.

Control of the castle does not mean control of the area

Retired Brig. Gen. Dr. Bahaa Halal said Beaufort Castle is one of southern Lebanon’s most important military and geopolitical sites because of its strategic location.

“Israeli military doctrine views Beaufort Castle as a key point for achieving visual and intelligence superiority, which forms part of fire superiority, as it allows the monitoring of movements between south and north of the Litani, the tracking of routes toward the western Bekaa and Iqlim al-Tuffah, as well as monitoring the operational environment of attack drones and FPV aircraft,” Halal told Asharq Al-Awsat.

Any “resistance force that is able to deploy freely around Beaufort Castle gains a tactical advantage in missile maneuvering, managing ambushes and concealing combat infrastructure inside the mountainous terrain,” he added, making the area a constant Israeli security concern.

“Israel can theoretically reach the surroundings of Beaufort Castle through air cover, prior destruction and special forces. But there is a major difference between reaching the area and maintaining stable control,” he remarked.

Holding it, he said, would require secure supply lines, fire control over the castle’s surroundings, preventing flanking moves and ambushes, and ensuring permanent superiority in observation.

Such conditions are difficult to secure in an area geographically connected to Arnoun, Yohmor, Zawtar, Iqlim al-Tuffah and the valleys leading to the Litani, he stressed.