“The United States will take control of the Gaza Strip, and we will also engage with it. We will own it and be responsible for dismantling all dangerous unexploded bombs and other weapons on site, levelling the area, and disposing of the destroyed buildings.”
This is how former US President Donald Trump announced his plan for “American Gaza” or, as he called it, the “Riviera of the Middle East.” He repeatedly proposed relocating Palestinians to various countries—one, two, three, four, five, seven, eight, or even twelve different destinations. When previously asked whether he would allow Gaza’s residents to return, he stated that he hoped to build “a place beautiful enough” that they would not wish to return. Trump frequently mentioned “American ownership” of the territory and envisioned “long-term control” of the region by the United States.
It appears that Trump remains in a state of euphoria following his victory in the US presidential elections. Almost daily—if not hourly—he makes statements that are not only provocative and unrealistic but also contradictory. Any observer can easily recognize this pattern: at one moment, he claims he will purchase the Gaza Strip, only to later deny it; at another, he asserts that Palestinians will be relocated to Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan, then reverses course by stating they may return after the territory is rebuilt. At times, he threatens to cut aid to Egypt, only to retract his statements soon after. Consequently, it has become common for news outlets—especially American ones—to feature breaking news alerts announcing yet another surprise statement from Trump before he retires for the night.
One undeniable fact is Egypt’s steadfast position, previously declared by all its officials—from President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi to the most junior diplomat at the Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Egyptian stance is clear: despite the importance of US-Egypt relations, Egypt will not compromise its principles or its role as a defender of Palestinian interests. Furthermore, Egyptian leadership recognizes that Washington has a vested interest in maintaining strong ties with Cairo—whether to uphold the peace treaty or to preserve regional stability. This understanding strengthens Egypt’s confidence in its ability to withstand US pressure. Additionally, Egyptian diplomacy possesses several strategic alternatives to limit Trump’s ability to implement his threats—an issue that may be discussed in detail at a later time.
Reactions to Trump’s statements have been overwhelmingly negative, often drawing ridicule and sharp criticism. During his first term, he sought to prove that he could fulfil most of his campaign promises, demonstrating that America is a global superpower capable of shaping the international agenda and implementing its plans despite internal and external opposition. This approach aligns with the “Madman Theory,” which we previously analyzed in another article.
However, this theory is not universally applicable. The Palestinian issue is uniquely complex and cannot be resolved using traditional European or even American historical frameworks—whether economic or military. It is not merely a regional conflict but a dispute over a single piece of land, with both parties holding deeply rooted historical, religious, and social claims that cannot be ignored or overridden.
Trump’s impractical plan is likely encouraged by the current state of devastation in Gaza, where a demographic crisis looms, threatening to trigger severe humanitarian and health challenges at any moment. While the vast majority of Palestinians aspire to rebuild their homes and live with dignity, they are often exploited by leaders who use religious slogans for personal financial gain.
Beyond religious extremism, high unemployment, poverty, and despair continue to fuel unrest and may lead to further violence. Even if Hamas were to be eliminated, any reconstruction efforts for Gaza must focus on job creation, the establishment of industrial zones, investments in infrastructure, and the development of a seaport and international airport to provide residents with economic opportunities. Concrete initiatives of this nature could tangibly improve daily life for Gaza’s residents, which in turn would enhance Israel’s economic and security conditions.
At present, Trump’s plan appears simplistic, utopian, and unfeasible for many well-known reasons. However, from the perspective of a businessman who thrives on deal-making, Trump cannot be dismissed as naive. He was the only leader who disregarded Arab and Western warnings—including some from Israeli officials—and went ahead with relocating the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, with no immediate consequences, contrary to expectations.
It seems that Trump has sought to establish his system, replacing traditional American diplomacy—which has often failed to prevent large-scale global conflicts—with “Trump’s World,” where he acts unilaterally, at least until he proves successful. However, this vision is not entirely new. During his inauguration speech, he declared, “America’s golden age begins now,” echoing the words of the 25th US President, William McKinley. McKinley oversaw rapid economic growth in the late 19th century through protective tariffs and, during his tenure, the US annexed Hawaii. Following a victory over Spain, America also gained control over the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Guam, and Cuba. Trump appears to be a modern replica of McKinley, from imposing tariffs on China, Canada, and the European Union to attempting to expand American territory—whether through acquiring Greenland, exerting influence over the Panama Canal, or now, proposing control over the Gaza Strip.
Ultimately, what concerns us today is Trump’s plan for Gaza. The question remains: Will the prolonged transitional phase of the global order, which has been in flux since the fall of the Berlin Wall, enable Trump to push through his plan? Or is he simply seeking a short-term political victory before moving on to another crisis, such as Ukraine? As the saying goes, “The devil is in the details,” and in this case, the details are numerous and troubling. Some analysts suggest that Trump’s ultimate goal is to permanently undermine the two-state solution, using an unrealistic proposal as a distraction to shift focus away from Palestinian statehood and toward an alternative governance arrangement involving administrative cooperation between the Palestinian Authority and Israel. Perhaps one day, Trump’s virtual world will simply vanish into thin air.
Dr. Hatem Sadek – Professor at Helwan University
