Trump’s Gaza Takeover Proposal Sparks International Condemnation and Fears of Regional Escalation
Trump’s Gaza Takeover Proposal Sparks International Condemnation and Fears of Regional Escalation
President Donald Trump’s controversial proposal to relocate Gaza’s Palestinian population and place the territory under U.S. control has drawn swift condemnation from Middle Eastern governments and foreign policy experts, raising concerns about destabilization and violations of international law. Unveiled during a February 4, 2025, press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the plan calls for Egypt, Jordan, and other Arab states to absorb Gaza’s 2 million residents, followed by American-led redevelopment of the coastal enclave. Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt rejected the proposal within hours, while analysts warned it risks triggering regional unrest, empowering extremist groups, and undermining decades of U.S. diplomacy. The move comes amid fragile Israel-Hamas ceasefire negotiations and escalating violence in the occupied West Bank.
The Proposal: A “Real Estate” Vision for Gaza
According to Foreign Policy’s reporting, Trump framed the plan as a pragmatic solution to Gaza’s postwar reconstruction, arguing the territory’s dense population and widespread infrastructure damage make rebuilding untenable without mass displacement. The proposal mirrors ideas previously floated by Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and former Middle East advisor, who in 2023 described Gaza’s coastline as “very valuable” and suggested civilian removal to facilitate Israeli security operations.
Steven A. Cook, a Middle East scholar at the Council on Foreign Relations, dismissed the plan as “sheer lunacy,” noting it lacks regional support and ignores Palestinian sovereignty claims. “Trump persists, insisting ‘people’ support his plan. He might just be riffing off a late-night phone call with pals from Mar-a-Lago,” Cook wrote.
Regional Backlash: Arab States Reject “Ethnic Cleansing”
Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan Issue Unprecedented Rebuke
Within hours of Trump’s announcement, Saudi Arabia released a 4 a.m. statement reaffirming commitment to a Palestinian state as a precondition for normalizing Israel relations—directly contradicting Trump’s Abraham Accords strategy. Egypt and Jordan, whose leaders Trump reportedly pressured privately, publicly denounced the proposal. Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi declared, “Jordan is for Jordanians, and Palestine is for Palestinians”.
Hala Rharrit, a former U.S. diplomat specializing in the Middle East, warned the plan is seen as a “declaration of war” across the Arab world. “Forcing Arab leaders to participate in Palestine’s ethnic cleansing would be political suicide,” she noted, citing protests erupting from Morocco to Jordan. Security Implications: Fueling Extremism and Terrorism
Experts Warn of ISIS, Al-Qaeda Recruitment Surge
Robert A. Pape, a University of Chicago terrorism researcher, cautioned that even discussing the U.S. occupation of Gaza provides potent propaganda for jihadist groups. His analysis of suicide attacks since 1982 links foreign military presence to extremist recruitment, citing Hezbollah’s rise after Israel’s Lebanon invasion and al-Qaeda’s growth during U.S. deployments in Saudi Arabia1.“Simply suggesting [occupation] puts Americans directly in the gunsights of Islamist extremists worldwide,” Pape stated, referencing the January 1, 2025, ISIS-inspired truck attack in New Orleans that killed 151. Political Fallout: Undermining U.S. Alliances and Legitimacy
Saudi-Israel Normalization at Risk
Aaron David Miller, a veteran U.S. Middle East negotiator, called the proposal the “most destructive” in decades, arguing it alienates critical partners like Egypt and Jordan while emboldening Iran. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, a key Trump ally, faces domestic backlash if perceived as abandoning Palestinian statehood—a red line for Riyadh’s potential Israel deal.
Yousef Munayyer of the Arab Center in Washington, D.C., added that the plan jeopardizes existing peace treaties: “Trump might undo the 1979 Egypt-Israel accord and 1994 Jordan-Israel agreement.”
Historical Context: Echoes of Colonialism and Nakba Fears
Palestinians See Continuation of Displacement Traumas
Dalia Hatuqa, a Palestinian journalist, reported widespread outrage in the West Bank, where residents view the proposal as an extension of Israel’s 1948 displacement of 700,000 Palestinians (the Nakba). “Trump’s idea felt like a grotesque extension of U.S. complicity in erasing our presence,” she wrote, noting parallel Israeli home demolitions and settler violence in Jenin and other cities.
Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib, a Gaza-born Atlantic Council analyst, argued the plan’s unfeasibility suggests it’s a pressure tactic: “Trump wants Gulf states to fund reconstruction and Egypt/Jordan to handle security, but this rhetoric damages U.S. credibility”.
Legal and Humanitarian Concerns
U.N. Experts Condemn Violations of International Law Though not directly quoted in Foreign Policy’s coverage, the proposal aligns with U.N. definitions of forcible transfer—a war crime under the Rome Statute. Matthew Duss of the Center for International Policy explicitly labeled it a “crime against humanity”1. Dennis Ross of the Washington Institute urged Arab leaders to counter with a viable postwar roadmap, criticizing the Biden administration’s prior “unconditional support” for Israel’s Gaza campaign as enabling Trump’s escalation.
What’s Next? Pathways to De-escalation
Diplomatic Offensives and Counterproposals Emerge
Egypt and Qatar are mediating renewed Israel-Hamas ceasefire talks, with Phase II negotiations addressing Gaza’s governance and reconstruction set for late February. The Hague Group—a coalition of nine nations including South Africa, Bolivia, and Malaysia—vowed to enforce International Court of Justice rulings against Israeli occupation, signaling growing global pushback.
Saudi Arabia and Jordan are reportedly drafting a joint plan emphasizing Palestinian self-determination, though details remain undisclosed. Meanwhile, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio faces scrutiny over aid freezes and USAID’s merger with the State Department, which critics argue weakens humanitarian capabilities during regional crises.