4 hours ago
5
ARTICLE AD BOX
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.
By ALEX WINSTON FEBRUARY 5, 2025 12:22
US President Donald Trump (R) meets with Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, on February 4, 2025.
(photo credit: Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images)
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, Trump 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, Trump’s 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 Trump’s 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 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 changes of the US taking over Gaza are close to zero. The idea is riddled with insurmountable obstacles.
First and foremost, Trump was re-elected 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.
Stay updated with the latest news!
Subscribe to The Jerusalem Post Newsletter
As president, Trump pushed for troop withdrawals in Syria and Afghanistan, criticizing prolonged U.S. 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 Trump’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 Trump’s 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, Trump 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.
English (US) ·