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.
Exactly, I posted much the same when this was first announced.
It’s a standard Trump negotiation tactic. Democrat and even some Republican reactions are comical.
Some of the headlines I browsed since Tuesday were pathetic.
+1
Its all about the marketing. Need to call it the Middle East Marshall plan or something similar.
Yes he was quite pleased at the thought of billion’s more of our taxpayer dollars and our trips to” clean up “ Gaza. Turned my stomach.
>>Who would govern this “development”?
The various host countries (i.e. Egypt, Jordan, etc.)
Regardless of outcome, the overall goal is to make the world recognize that NO ONE wants a gazan in their neighborhood.
WHY? Think about it.
Related threads
Sorry, But Trump Is Wrong on Resettling Palestinians in Jordan and Egypt
Trump lays out exactly how he plans for US to seize control of Gaza
I’m of the minority opinion that this is not just a bargaining ploy by President Trump. The “experts” derisively tell us that it’s undoable. They also said Trump could never get elected by promising a to build a massive border wall, implement mass deportations, or a number of other “outside the box” ideas he’s proposed over the years.
None of the reasons offered as to why the Gaza plan could never be done are really intractable. And drawing comparisons to the U.S. occupation of Iraq is misleading. Iraq had internal struggles between Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds which complicated things, as did Iran’s active influence over Iraq’s internal politics. The situation in Gaza is very different. Hamas has had a political monopoly in Gaza. Gaza is also much smaller in both population and area than Iraq, and the relative devastation of the country goes far beyond what existed in Iraq.
Beyond that, the idea that U.S. troops would be occupying Gaza is misleading. Any such occupation would be part of a multi-national force and would not be the occupation of an active battle field but more akin to the allied occupation of Germany after World War II.
Refugees already want to leave Gaza. That would be the starting point for any such plan. It wouldn’t be a question of going into Gaza and rounding them up but rather allowing them to leave and providing transportation to the sites of these new settlements. Temporary housing, whose conditions would still be better than current conditions on the ground in Gaza, could be provided while a permanent settlement is being built.
This is eminently doable. It’s just a matter of mustering the political will to do so. If we could send a man to the moon, we can make this happen.
At the same time we should remember that Trump told Hamas;
"US President-elect Donald Trump has issued an apparent warning to Hamas, threatening "all hell to pay" if hostages held in Gaza are not released by the time he returns to the White House on 20 January.
Dozens of people taken during the 7 October 2023 Hamas attack remain unaccounted for. On Monday, the Israeli military said an Israeli-American soldier who it believed to be a captive had in fact been killed last October.
Without mentioning Hamas by name, Trump posted online the same day: "Those responsible will be hit harder than anybody has been hit in the long and storied history of the United States of America."
Perhaps this why he keeps saying that Gaza is a bombed out waste, a hell on earth. If Hamas and Gaza cannot run a country responsibly it should be taken from them. Let the Arab countries absorb them, they had their chance, they spent all their money on digging tunnels to hell instead of making a good life for their inhabitants (the people who hate jews and voted Hamas the power over them.)
>>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.
Or maybe he was imagining how nice it would be living without the constant threat of a terrorist state on his northern border. Do you really think Trump is going to spend massive U.S. tax dollars on this? That’s not the way Trump operates. He would leverage Arab wealth from the Gulf States and other nations in the region who have grown tired of the open sore of Gaza festering in their midst. He would also leverage private money from business interests around the world.
We’ve known how Trump operates for years now yet the breathless alarm being exhibited on this forum over Trump’s gaza comments are ridiculous.
Read “Art of the Deal” and get a clue.
(Jeremiah regarding Babylon: "a heap of rubble, a jackals’ den, a desolation and an object of scorn, without inhabitants")
Are we biblical yet? No, still in process.
Research Netanyahu’s ‘Gaza 2035 Plan’.
If one understands scripture accurately, we’re witnessing certain chapters of ‘The Book of Revelation come to life’.
Trump, Gaza and the $80-billion question....
I’m genuinely gratified and deeply touched by your quaint
naivete but supremely disappointed by your rank stupidity.
Negotiations, huh?
Trump has a better chance of building Trump Towers on the Gaza Strip than he does negotiating with Palis.
Sorry. This article is baloney.
>>”Trump, Gaza and the $80-billion question....”
Such a well thought out and well articulated rebuttal. /s
If it only made sense I’d be able to respond.
Maybe you can take a course in “reading comprehension?”
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.