For nearly eighteen months since the Gaza war began and especially after the January ceasefire, the question of Gaza’s post-war governance has gained traction. World leaders, diplomats and analysts have proposed numerous solutions. The most striking was U.S. President Donald Trump’s plan to transform Gaza into an American-owned development project—the “Riviera of the Middle East”—by forcibly relocating Palestinians to neighbouring Arab nations, sparking intense debate and global criticism.
By Dr. Aftab Alam Professor & HoD Strategic Security Studies, Aligarh Muslim University, for The News Analytics Journal
a 5 mins read.
Trump’s proposal to relocate the Gaza population sparked sharp reactions worldwide, raising serious concerns and prompting the Arab world to find an alternative to Trump’s plan. Trump announced his Gaza plan on February 4, during a joint media briefing with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump said that “The US will take over the Gaza Strip” and dismantle “all of the dangerous unexploded bombs and other weapons on the site and get rid of the destroyed buildings. Create an economic development that will supply unlimited numbers of jobs and housing for the people of the area.” Trump also stated that Palestinians “have no alternative” but to leave the “big pile of rubble”. Netanyahu praised Trump’s plan as “revolutionary” and “creative”.
Notwithstanding multiple attempts by his White House officials to walk back Trump’s comments, he has since doubled down on his plan. On February 6, in a post on Truth Social, he provided further details as to how his Gaza takeover plan would unfold: “The Gaza Strip would be turned over to the United States by Israel after fighting. The Palestinians, people like Chuck Schumer, would have already been resettled in far safer and more beautiful communities, with new and modern homes, in the region. They would have a chance to be happy, safe and free.”
Later, on February 9, Trump reiterated his plan and told reporters on board Air Force One that “I’m committed to buying and owning Gaza,” without explaining who he would buy the territory from and how the US would own it.
The idea of expelling Palestinians from Gaza is not a new one and it has long been a fantasy of Israeli ultranationalists.
THE STRATEGY
Drawing on Trump’s book The Art of the Deal, many analysts see his plan as a mere tactic to pressurise Arab countries to recognise and normalise their ties with Israel by expanding the Abraham Accords. Trump explains in his book that a successful negotiator must start with a maximalist position that scares the other party into making concessions before negotiations even begin. Trump wishes to achieve through political pressure what Israel could not accomplish militarily over fifteen months of a vicious, destructive war. Israel failed to disarm and eliminate Hamas from Gaza completely, which remained its primary objective throughout the war besides ensuring the release of the Israeli hostages.
Following the rejection from the Arab world, the US and Israel have now reached out to East African poor and violence-wracked nations – Sudan, Somalia and Somaliland – to discuss the possibility of using their territories as potential destinations for resettling Palestinians uprooted from Gaza under Trump’s plan. The US and Israel intend to offer these countries incentives from debt relief and military and security assistance to diplomatic support. However, while Sudan has rejected the US overtures, Somalia and Somaliland have stated that they were unaware of any such plan.
THE ARAB COUNTERPLAN
Arab countries, which have often been rightly criticised for their passivity, have countered Trump’s proposal with their plan for the reconstruction of Gaza without displacing the population as part of a future Palestinian state with an outline of an interim government of independent Palestinian experts without Hamas. The contours of the Arab counterproposal emerged from an emergency Arab League summit in Cairo on March 4, amid growing concern that Gaza’s fragile ceasefire deal could collapse after the expiry of the first phase in March.
The Arab League plan later secured the backing of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), a 57-member grouping representing the Muslim states, at an emergency meeting in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on March 8. The OIC also urged the international community and international and regional funding institutions to swiftly provide the necessary support for the regional initiative. The OIC described Trump’s move “as ethnic cleansing” and “a grave violation of international law and a crime against humanity.”
The most striking aspect of the Egyptian-crafted Arab proposal is the $53 billion plan for Gaza reconstruction in three phases spanning over five years. In the first phase, which would last six months and cost $3bn, millions of tonnes of rubble and any unexploded ordnance would be cleared; some 1.5 million displaced Gazans would be moved into 200,000 prefabricated temporary housing units, and 60,000 repaired homes which were partly destroyed.
The second phase, lasting two years and costing $20bn, would involve full-scale infrastructure development, including schools, universities, hospitals, roads, electricity plants, desalination facilities, and residential housing of varying densities. The plan also included markets, government buildings, parks, hotels, and tourist sites. An airport, two seaports and an industrial zone would be built during the third phase, which would take another two and a half years and cost $30bn. The final phase also aims to pave the way for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state through direct negotiations between Palestinians and Israelis under international supervision.
The Arab plan proposes to generate the requisite funds for rebuilding Gaza from a variety of sources, including the UN and international financial organisations, as well as foreign and private sector investments, for which an international donor conference would be convened soon in Cairo. The primary funding for the Gaza reconstruction plan is expected to come mainly from the Arab countries, who have also previously helped Palestinians financially. Arab leaders also proposed to establish a trust fund under international supervision to pay for Gaza’s reconstruction and urged the international community to back it. The European Union has welcomed the Gaza reconstruction plan and assured its continued political and financial support. However, the Trump administration has said that it would not pay for the reconstruction of Gaza.
The Arab plan also proposes that post-war Gaza would be temporarily governed for a transitional period of six months by an “administrative committee” made up of independent Palestinian technocrats and non-partisan members while “working towards empowering the Palestinian Authority (PA) to return”. The committee would be responsible for overseeing humanitarian aid and temporarily managing Gaza’s affairs. Most importantly, the Arab plan ruled out any possibility of Hamas governing post-war Gaza and took off the table any thought that Gaza’s residents could be relocated. Though the Arab plan does not offer any plan to disarm Hamas, it recognises the existence of Hamas and other armed Palestinian resistance groups as a “key challenge” and underlines that their presence would be resolved permanently if the root causes of armed resistance are addressed through a political process upholding Palestinian rights.
The Arab plan also calls for the United Nations Security Council to deploy an international peacekeeping force in Gaza and the Israeli-occupied West Bank to oversee governance in Gaza until reconstruction is complete. This would be part of a broader “timeline leading to the establishment of a Palestinian state and the building of its capabilities.” Though the scope, mandate and deployment zones of the proposed peacekeeping force are yet to be finalised and would not be free from significant challenges, it would certainly help separate the Palestinians from the Israelis and protect Palestinian territory from being further robbed by Israel through ever-expanding Jewish settlements, mainly in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Additionally, the UN force may prove very useful in preventing infiltration and new cross-border attacks. However, the UN peacekeeping operation could only be effective if deployed in support of a viable political solution.
Arab proposal of a $53 billion Gaza reconstruction plan would generate funding from the UN and international financial organisations, as well as foreign and private sector investments.
ARAB’S ALTERNATIVE
While the PA and Hamas have welcomed the Arab alternative plan for the post-war reconstruction of the Gaza Strip, the US and Israel have rejected the plan without offering any alternative. Their main complaint against the Arab plan is that it does not recognise the threat Hamas poses to Israel and the region. The U.S. National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes said in a statement that the Arab proposal “does not address the reality that Gaza is currently uninhabitable and residents cannot humanely live in a territory covered in debris and unexploded ordnance.” Later, US State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce stated that Trump’s plan was “an invitation for new ideas and it seemed to have spurred some new ideas” from the Arab world but characterised the Arab proposal as “inadequate”. However, the leading European countries like Germany, the United Kingdom, Italy and France have extended their full support to the Arab plan.
The Arab plan for post-war Gaza may not be the most ideal and perfect one, but it certainly offers an alternative to Trump’s ludicrous plan and Israel’s long ambition to occupy the territory permanently. It is based on a realistic assessment of the situation and at least provides a framework for continued diplomatic engagement. The formation of an interim non-Hamas government comprising Palestinian independent experts could be a good starting point for further negotiations over a plan acceptable to all stakeholders that ensures an independent Palestinian state and a permanent end to the suffering of the people of Gaza and addresses Israeli security concerns. Undoubtedly there would be serious challenges along the way, but the task of rebuilding Gaza cannot wait until all the issues are resolved to the satisfaction of all parties.
The Arab plan is more detailed and far more realistic than Trump’s plan, which is dangerously destabilising, morally reprehensible and tantamount to ethnic cleansing. Trump’s plan is also a serious blow to the two-state solution, which has been the cornerstone of Middle East peace efforts for decades. The Arab plan rightly calls for the immediate implementation of the second and third phases of the ceasefire agreement, including the complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza and the large-scale resumption of humanitarian aid to its suffering population that has been thrust into the most extreme level of destitution.
(Dr Aftab Alam, is a Professor who teaches international law at Aligarh Muslim University and heads its Strategic and Security Studies Programme. The views expressed are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The News Analytics Journal.)
Major Highlights
- Trump proposed to relocate the Gaza population and take over the Strip by the US.
- The Arab world has rejected the Gazans’ relocation plan.
- The US has reached out to Sudan, Somalia and Somaliland for the relocation plan.
- Arab countries have proposed a $53 billion Gaza reconstruction plan without displacing the population.
- The Arab plan ruled out any possibility of Hamas governing post-war Gaza.
- The EU has welcomed the Gaza reconstruction plan, contradicting Trump’s plan.
