Who would govern this "development"?
Posted on 02/06/2025 4:52:57 AM PST by bert
On the face of it, Trump’s plan for the US to occupy Gaza is not remotely feasible, but that could all be part of the president’s scheme. US President Donald Trump dropped a bombshell on Tuesday when he announced that the United States will take over the Gaza Strip for the foreseeable future.
With his declaration, the president has once again thrown a diplomatic grenade into the Middle East conversation – not a particularly quiet region at the best of times and one beset by 15 months of war.
The proposal – one that envisions the US developing Gaza, creating jobs, and turning it into an international hub – immediately triggered widespread backlash. The Palestinians see it as a veiled attempt at forced displacement, Israel remains cautious, and Arab states like Egypt and Jordan swiftly rejected the idea.
On the face of it, the plan is not remotely feasible. The US military occupying Gaza is a logistical and political nightmare. Some 20 years of experience in dealing with Iraq and Afghanistan will have taught the upper echelons in the Pentagon that Arab states would never publicly accept a mass Palestinian exodus onto their soil.
Even Israel, despite its frustration with Hamas, understands the consequences of such a move.
But here’s the thing – Trump probably knows that, too. The former president is not proposing a realistic strategy. He’s making an opening bid in a negotiation.
This is Trumpian negotiation 101, lifted straight from his 1987 book The Art of the Deal.
In his world, you start with an extreme demand – one that is so outrageous it shifts the boundaries of what was previously considered possible. Then, when the inevitable pushback comes, you negotiate down to something that, while far less extreme than your initial position, is still a big win. You aim for 100, knowing that landing at 50 is still a success.
TRUMP’S TRACK record in real estate and politics could suggest that his goal isn’t to occupy Gaza – it’s to force neighboring Arab nations, who have up until now dragged their feet, to take a more active role in solving the crisis. His assumption? That the shock of such a radical proposal will jolt Egypt, Jordan, and the Gulf states into stepping up in ways they have so far refused to.
For decades, Arab nations have loudly supported the Palestinian cause, but they have done little to materially improve the situation in Gaza beyond funneling money to Hamas.
Egypt, which once ruled Gaza, keeps its border tightly sealed, building barriers that make Israel’s security walls look lenient by comparison. Jordan, already home to a massive Palestinian population, wants no part of an influx from Gaza. Meanwhile, wealthy Gulf states, despite their enormous resources, have largely avoided offering Palestinian refugees permanent resettlement or serious infrastructure investments in Gaza.
By throwing out a seemingly preposterous plan, Trump may be forcing these countries to react – if only to reject his idea and propose an alternative. Suddenly, discussions about how to rebuild Gaza, who will govern it, and where displaced Palestinians might go shift from a vague, open-ended conversation to one with real stakes.
What are the obstacles? To be very clear: The chances of the US taking over Gaza are close to zero. The idea is riddled with insurmountable obstacles.
First and foremost, Trump was reelected on his renewed position of America First. Changing trade agreements and diplomatic relationships with other countries is intended to improve the domestic lives of ordinary Americans. Suddenly switching to occupying a foreign piece of land is a cost that is unlikely to pass a Republican-controlled Congress eager to reduce overseas military entanglements. The American public has no appetite for another Middle East quagmire.
The comments also go against the military record of the previous Trump administration.
As president, Trump pushed for troop withdrawals in Syria and Afghanistan, criticizing prolonged US involvement abroad. Why would he now advocate for the most challenging US military intervention in decades?
EVEN AMERICA’S closest Arab allies – Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, and the UAE – would never sign off on a US-controlled Gaza. It would violate their long-standing position that Palestinians must control their own land.
Plus, there is regional stability to consider. An American military presence in Gaza would become an instant target for Iranian-backed militias, Hamas, and jihadist groups. The risk of constant insurgency-style attacks would make long-term governance impossible.
Regarding the president’s comments on Gaza itself, the enclave is in ruins, its infrastructure decimated. Rebuilding it would take a decade and billions of dollars, requiring international cooperation – something a unilateral US occupation would make nearly impossible.
Trump’s real calculation may be that the mere suggestion of US control over Gaza will shake the Arab world into action.
Egypt, which has taken a hands-off approach for years, might suddenly find itself pressured to open border crossings, facilitate aid, or help manage security. Jordan, wary of another Palestinian refugee crisis, could be pushed into a more active diplomatic role. The Gulf states, embarrassed by Trump’s framing of them as mere bystanders, might finally invest in Palestinian infrastructure instead of just issuing pro-Palestinian rhetoric at the UN.
The key to his thinking is not the literal implementation of his words, but their ability to reframe the debate. He doesn’t need to “win” the Gaza issue outright; he just needs to move the goalposts.
By aiming for an impossible maximum, the president makes the previously unthinkable suddenly seem reasonable. A few weeks ago, the idea of Egypt or Jordan taking a bigger role in post-war Gaza was off the table. Now, it may start looking like the moderate alternative.
This is classic Trump deal-making: start at the extreme, let everyone panic, then walk it back to something that, while less dramatic, still represents real movement in his direction.
So, will the US take over Gaza? If it does, then we are all in for a shock.
Will Trump’s declaration change the conversation and possibly push Arab nations into doing more?
That’s the real deal.
The solution to the Palestinian and Gazan reconstruction has already been decided and is incorporated into the Abraham accords. Except the major Arabs can't participate until their people are on board.
Trump has offered a throw away gambit to allow Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE and Jordan to reject the deal while making proposals allowing them to come on board.
All are needed for money and governance of the new state. The new Protectorate is going to take years to reach the point where it can be economically and politically a free standing sovereign. All the nations above, Israel and the USA know that and are now working the plan to make it reality
Who would govern this "development"?
Yes, great analysis. But one correction. He isn’t the former President. He is THE President.
I’m thinking, the deal will be, any US contribution, (and it needs to be small), is not to rebuild Gaza, but relocate Pallies in a third country, like Jordon. They can have a nice home there, or live in rubble on the Gaza Strip. Deal or No Deal ?
No offense, but “duh” is my reaction, from one who’s avoided reading anything on the matter at all until this…
…’this’ being the only analysis a normal person would conclude from POTUS’ announcement.
Trumps plan is a kick in the ass. Don’t like it do something else, but don’t do nothing.
Trump loves to pull swords from rocks
with which he cuts gordian knots.
His plan will be a miserable failure, like his tariffs! /sarc
While the analysis is generally very good, this statement is 50% wrong. Occupying Gaza is logistically a piece of cake compared to trying to operate in Iraq or Afghanistan. We can control the med, keep the Iranians out and move supplies by ship from the US or our European so-called allies.
The politics are another thing altogether. The problem is that our globalist warmongers since George Bush the elder have focused on one global sphere of US influence taking on land wars on the Asian plan, and its extension into Europe and the ME, as lightly as things that are properly within the sphere of influence of the US as a maritime power, our strength and the thing we damned near gave away and lost to China as we pursued our globalist - DEI fueled [to show how stupid and evil the progenitors of this strategy are] - empire. We are turning that around.
Our natural allies are our trading partners reached across the oceans, not friggin' Tajikistan or whatever stan the independent government of the Intel Blob thinks we want to launch the next color revolution in.
It's not a little mistake on the side of an otherwise great analysis. It's a point that all such analyses need to start from - who should we be allied with? What is in our national interest?
Yes. None of the players will let this stand.
So now they have to come up with a plan. Together.
Did Trump just end the war?
Go to a city like Manila, and you see malls five times bigger than a typical US mall (4 or 5 floors), surrounded by 30 to 50 story condos that house thousands of families. There are dozens of these 1st world complexes in 3rd world Manila, either complete or under construction. I’m pretty sure that’s what Trump envisions - the US can help manage the vision, but the Arabs need to pay for it.
Nobody wants the Palestinians. They have this uncanny ability to make themselves almost universally loathed wherever they go. Jordan took in a whole bunch of them after the ‘67 war and ended up having to fight with them for control of the country. That’s how a whole lot of them ended up in Lebanon and Syria. We’ve all seen what a wonderful place Lebanon became when the Palis showed up. They’re the Haitians of the middle east.
CC
They have had the plan for years. The plan is included in the Abraham accords. Saudi Arabia was just about to publicly come on board when Hamas assaulted Israel.
Iran could not permit the plan to go into effect because it would end Iranian influence over Hamas and Hexbollah
Hamas and Hezbollah are effectively dead, Iran is out of Syria and no longer able to assault Israel nor the USA
F=MA
“Who would govern this “development”?”
Rebuild Gaza using only green technology. It could be the beta test for implementing green energy around the world. Governments and private businesses can align to make this happen. It would be a new territory whose biggest feature is no material using petroleum products would be used.
Move the UN there. Praise the unified collaboration of governments and the Palestinian people. On the day of operations, hold a huge party.
Then nuke the place from orbit just to be certain.
The look on Netanyahu’s face when Trump dropped the Gaza bombshell was priceless.........
he could hardly add up the plan’s potential US tax dollar billions that would be coming his way.
It’s like a 17 yr. old telling his parents he wants a motorcycle…knowing they will object and then cave in to getting him a car
I’ve had to make the point to people ignorant of the history. Besides outlining Black September, I tell people to look at the wall Egypt has built on their border with Gaza, to see what their fellow Arabs think of the Palestinians.
He throws out a crazy idea everyone sh##s their pants, as he intended it to do, he got their attention! don’t like it? “what’s your plan”? the old ways are not on the table get back to me if you dont like mine
We’ve already started!
He can focus on the “Biden Pier” the US built and develop inward from there!
Move the UN there.
++++++++++++
This is the best option.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.