Trump aides support the proposal for a takeover of Gaza but retract certain aspects of it

President Donald Trump‘s senior advisors vigorously defended his initiative to relocate Palestinians from Gaza and suggested a U.S. takeover of the war-torn region, although they distanced themselves from certain aspects of his plan amid widespread international criticism.

The proposal faced backlash on Wednesday from major global powers, including Russia, China, and Germany, which warned it could lead to “new suffering and new hatred.” Saudi Arabia, a significant player in the region, outright rejected the idea.

In contrast, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described Trump’s proposal as “remarkable” and encouraged further exploration of it, though he did not clarify what he believed Trump was specifically offering.

Just two weeks into his presidency, Trump disrupted decades of U.S. foreign policy with a vaguely articulated vision of transforming Gaza into the “Riviera of the Middle East,” where international communities could coexist following nearly 16 months of Israeli airstrikes that resulted in over 47,000 Palestinian deaths, according to local reports.

During a White House briefing on Wednesday, press secretary Karoline Leavitt praised the Gaza proposal as a historic example of “outside of the box” thinking, while emphasizing that the president had not committed to deploying U.S. troops in the area. However, she did not completely dismiss the possibility of military involvement. Additionally, Leavitt clarified Trump’s earlier statement regarding the permanent resettlement of Gazans, indicating instead that they should be “temporarily relocated” to facilitate the rebuilding efforts.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio indicated that the intention was for residents of Gaza to temporarily evacuate the area during a phase of reconstruction and debris removal. In a Fox News interview, Netanyahu provided a vague response to Trump’s proposal, expressing skepticism that the president intended to deploy U.S. troops to combat Hamas in Gaza or that the U.S. would fund reconstruction efforts there.

Following a meeting with Trump at the White House on Tuesday, Netanyahu endorsed the idea that Gazans should have the option to leave and later return to their war-torn homeland. “They can leave, and then come back. They can relocate and return,” he stated. Netanyahu described the concept as “remarkable,” advocating for its serious consideration and implementation, although he did not provide further details.

It remains uncertain whether Trump will pursue his proposal or if he is merely using it as a negotiating tactic, consistent with his reputation as a savvy dealmaker. His first term was marked by numerous bold foreign policy statements, many of which were not acted upon. Last year, Trump’s son-in-law and former advisor, Jared Kushner, referred to Gaza as prime waterfront real estate, and on Tuesday, Trump echoed this sentiment by advocating for the permanent resettlement of over 2 million Palestinians from the region.

Some analysts have indicated that the suggested measures could breach international law, while others have labeled the proposals as impractical. Human rights advocates have characterized the plan as tantamount to “ethnic cleansing.”

“Everyone is in favor of it,” Trump remarked to reporters in the Oval Office earlier on Wednesday, referring to his concept for Gaza.

However, Trump’s proposal seems to contradict U.S. public sentiment, which has shown significant opposition to further involvement in conflict zones, particularly after prolonged military engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan. Throughout the 2024 election campaign and following his return to office, Trump has consistently claimed he would put an end to what he termed “ridiculous” wars and prevent new ones from arising.

His Gaza initiative faced widespread criticism from Democratic lawmakers, while some Republicans expressed confusion and skepticism, although a few commended the approach as audacious.

“I thought we voted for America first,” Republican Senator Rand Paul stated on X. “We should not be considering yet another occupation that would squander our resources and endanger our soldiers.”

During a visit to Guatemala, Rubio, seemingly attempting to address the global backlash, asserted that Trump’s proposal was not an aggressive action but rather a generous offer that demonstrated “the United States’ commitment to the reconstruction of that region.”

Leavitt stated that U.S. taxpayers would not bear the financial burden, asserting that Trump would negotiate agreements with regional allies.

‘TRUMP CAN GO TO HELL’

King Abdullah of Jordan, who is scheduled to meet Trump at the White House next week, expressed his opposition to any plans for land annexation or the displacement of Palestinians. Egypt announced its support for recovery initiatives in Gaza following a ceasefire that began on January 19, emphasizing that Palestinians would not be required to leave the area.

In Gaza, residents amidst the ruins of their homes firmly rejected such notions. “Trump can go to hell, along with his ideas, his money, and his beliefs. We are not going anywhere. We are not his assets,” declared Samir Abu Basel, a father of five who was displaced from his home due to the conflict.

Since his inauguration on January 20, Trump has made remarks about a potential U.S. acquisition of Greenland, raised concerns about the possible takeover of the Panama Canal, and suggested that Canada should become the 51st state of the U.S. Critics have argued that his expansionist language resembles traditional imperialism, potentially emboldening Russia in its conflict with Ukraine and providing China with a rationale for invading Taiwan.

Global leaders have reiterated their commitment to the two-state solution, which has been a cornerstone of U.S. policy in the region for many years, positing that Gaza would be part of a future Palestinian state alongside the Israeli-occupied West Bank.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated prior to a meeting with Netanyahu that the Pentagon is “ready to consider all options” concerning Gaza. Analysts suggest that a significant deployment of U.S. forces would be necessary to secure the region if Trump moves forward with his proposal.

‘RIDICULOUS AND ABSURD’

A representative from the Palestinian militant organization Hamas described Trump’s proposal as “ridiculous and absurd.” Hamas governed the Gaza Strip prior to the conflict, which began following its cross-border attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, resulting in 1,200 fatalities and 250 abductions, according to Israeli reports. Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters that such proposals could potentially escalate tensions in the region, emphasizing that Hamas remains dedicated to the ceasefire agreement with Israel and is focused on negotiating its next steps.

The implications of Trump’s proposals on the indirect discussions regarding the second phase of the Gaza ceasefire and hostage-release agreement remain uncertain. Hamas has firmly stated its intention to stay in Gaza, while Netanyahu has pledged to eliminate the group and prevent it from regaining control of the territory.

Trump’s proposal also raises concerns about Saudi Arabia’s willingness to participate in a renewed U.S.-facilitated effort for a historic normalization of relations with Israel. Saudi Arabia, a crucial U.S. ally in the Middle East, has maintained that it will not establish relations with Israel without the establishment of a Palestinian state, countering Trump’s assertion that Riyadh does not require a Palestinian homeland.

Trump is encouraging Saudi Arabia to emulate the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, both of which became trade and business centers in the Middle East after signing the Abraham Accords in 2020 and normalizing relations with Israel.

However, on Wednesday, the foreign ministry of Saudi Arabia stated that the kingdom opposes any efforts to displace Palestinians from their land, emphasizing that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has expressed this stance in a “clear and explicit manner.”