The completion date for the temporary port inside the Gaza Strip, announced by U.S. President Joe Biden in early March, is approaching. This port aims to deliver humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza, who are suffering from severe famine, amid Israel’s clear reluctance to facilitate aid entry. This development raises questions about Biden’s true motives for establishing the port.
What is the American Project?
In response to Israeli delays and obstacles in delivering humanitarian aid by land to Gaza, President Biden announced on March 8th, during his State of the Union address, that he had instructed the military to establish a temporary port on Gaza’s coast. This port will receive shipments of food, water, and medicine. The aid will first arrive in Cyprus, where it will be inspected and prepared for delivery, then transported by commercial ships to a floating platform off Gaza, and from there, smaller vessels will move it to the seaway.
Additionally, the U.S. has announced that about a thousand military personnel and officers will be stationed in the area to secure the port once it becomes operational. However, American officials clarified that the project does not involve “deploying ground forces.” Initially, the operational capacity will be 90 aid trucks per day, increasing to 150 trucks daily.
It is also noteworthy that British Foreign Secretary David Cameron announced that Britain, alongside the U.S., would build a maritime corridor to transport aid to Gaza. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen expressed Europe’s willingness to finance relief efforts for Palestinians, announcing the launch of a maritime corridor from Cyprus with the U.S. and the United Arab Emirates.
American Motives
There are several objectives behind the U.S. decision to establish a maritime corridor, which can be outlined as follows:
First, Washington may seek to achieve multiple political goals through the maritime corridor. These include enhancing its influence in the Mediterranean region against Russian expansion efforts in Syria and Libya on one hand, and countering China’s growing influence in the region on the other. Washington is concerned about China’s increasing interest in establishing a presence in Mediterranean ports.
Washington is also likely aiming to secure one of the anticipated major trade routes announced in September 2023 at the G20 Summit in India. The U.S., Saudi Arabia, India, the UAE, France, Germany, Italy, and the European Union agreed to sign a memorandum of understanding for a new economic corridor connecting India, the Middle East, and Europe. This corridor is intended to rival China’s Belt and Road Initiative, with Washington aiming to weaken the Chinese initiative by creating trade routes between Eastern and Western markets.
Second, the U.S. might use humanitarian aid as a pretext to militarize the region and encircle Iranian presence. This is especially pertinent given the U.S. emphasis on deploying American soldiers to protect the port. Some reports also suggest the possibility of British forces being deployed on the ground in Gaza to assist in delivering aid via the maritime corridor.
British Foreign Secretary David Cameron has stated that Britain will cooperate with the U.S. to open a maritime corridor to deliver aid directly to Gaza. This indicates the alignment of British interests with American moves in the region. Moreover, the integration of specialized British military planning teams within the U.S. operations headquarters in Tampa, Florida, and Cyprus for several weeks is expected to extend Britain’s influence in Cyprus, where it maintains a military base.
London has used the Akrotiri base for several British and American military operations in the Middle East, including operations targeting Libya, Syria, and Iraq, as well as recent airstrikes against the Houthis. This has sparked anger among the Cypriot population, who have protested the use of Nicosia’s territory as a launch point for these attacks, leading to widespread protests earlier this year.
Third, the strategic importance of this step extends beyond the humanitarian aspect, encompassing training for a combat operation that could play a pivotal role in the event of armed conflict in the Taiwan Strait. The U.S. fleet, through this mission, demonstrates its ability to establish maritime bridges that overcome logistical obstacles and enhance the effectiveness of American forces in facing military challenges. This corridor is part of the Joint Logistics Over-the-Shore (JLOTS) system, which facilitates the unloading of humanitarian aid and is considered a strategic option that enhances the Pentagon’s capabilities and provides greater flexibility in dealing with crises.
Fourth, Washington also seeks to be an active participant in the interactions of the Eastern Mediterranean region to secure the interests of its energy companies and strategic allies. Additionally, a presence in the Mediterranean would help Washington manage tensions if they re-emerge between Turkey, Greece, and Cyprus, as Biden likely wants to ensure calm among these countries, especially with the upcoming U.S. elections.
It is noteworthy that some reports have indicated that after the port is completed, Yasser Arafat Airport will be operational again, and an artificial island will be constructed later to circumvent Houthi militias’ attacks in the Red Sea.
Fifth, there are economic objectives that are believed to be among the motives behind Washington’s establishment of the maritime corridor. The most important of these are the natural gas resources and international trade routes in the region. Some have suggested that Washington wants to ease the blockade on Israeli ports, which have faced incursions and closures, such as the commercial ports of Eilat, Ashdod, and Ashkelon.
Multiple Indicators
The maritime corridor project carries several indications that can be summarized as follows:
American Maneuvering: While Washington seeks to establish the maritime corridor to increase the volume of humanitarian aid to Gaza, the U.S. Congress approved $26.4 billion in aid to Israel on April 20, 2024. Additionally, the U.S. used its veto power against the Algerian proposal to grant Palestine full membership in the United Nations on April 19, highlighting Washington’s support for Tel Aviv in its war on Gaza. This suggests that the U.S.’s declared motives for establishing the maritime corridor are merely to mislead and improve its image before the international community and the American public, who are discontented with Biden’s handling of the Gaza issue, especially following recent protests on American university campuses. This reflects an attempt by the U.S. president to appease the local electoral base he is on the verge of losing.
Direct U.S. Involvement: The U.S. consistently defends Israel’s security and stability, which was evident in its response to the recent Iranian attack on Tel Aviv. However, the presence of U.S. military personnel could directly drag Washington into the conflict if Hamas targets the military forces, especially after an attack occurred near the area where the maritime corridor will intersect with the land.
Israeli Obstruction: Tel Aviv has not adequately protected aid deliveries, as more than 100 people were killed last February, either by Israeli forces guarding the convoy, according to Palestinian witnesses, or by being trampled in the crowd, according to the Israeli army. Furthermore, trucks and warehouses have been bombed, roads destroyed by Israeli forces, and police in the Gaza Strip have stopped guarding aid convoys after being previously targeted by Israeli occupation forces. Therefore, it is likely that Tel Aviv will obstruct the delivery of aid via the maritime corridor, especially after announcing that aid will be delivered only after security checks according to Israeli standards, which also means that the final decision to allow any aid entry lies with Tel Aviv.
Undermining the Palestinian Cause: It is not far-fetched to consider that Tel Aviv welcomes the project because it aligns with Israeli plans for the forced displacement of Palestinians and the dismantling of UNRWA, the agency mandated to provide aid, especially after the independent committee tasked with reviewing and examining the accusations made by Israel cleared UNRWA of all Israeli allegations on April 22.
In conclusion, the U.S. has several motives for establishing the maritime corridor; if it truly wanted to address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, it could achieve this by pressuring Israel to open land crossings without needing to establish this costly and lengthy-to-construct maritime corridor to achieve its stated purpose. It is particularly noteworthy that the estimated cost for the U.S. to build the corridor has risen to $320 million.
