Trump's Gaza Peace Plan: More Than Meets the Eye?

I rarely comment on the Middle East. Positions are far too polarized and nuance is completely lost in virtually any discussion of Israeli-Palestinian issues. I have my opinion, which I largely don’t express in this piece. But something is rotten here and that something is Donald Trump.

Memories seem short these days, especially when it comes to Donald Trump. It’s been 10 months since his return to power - a short time by a historical measure. Yet during that time he’s managed to dominate news cycles around the world as he has lurched from one artificial crisis to another. We’ve already forgotten his threats against Panama, his siding with Putin in Ukraine, his demand for Greenland and his threats to Denmark, his equivocation on support to NATO, and his attack on Iran in support of Israel. We’re already starting to ignore his strikes against so-called “drug traffickers” off Venezuela and his incredibly odious domestic policies. And we’ve forgotten what Trump has said about Gaza.

The media is falling all over themselves to praise Trump’s new found statesmanship and his “pivotal” role in securing a ceasefire in Gaza. What has been forgotten in all of the hoopla is Trump’s longer term vision for Gaza and for Middle East peace. It’s a vision that is firmly pro-Israel and, worse, may enable Trump’s personal financial interest. After all, Trump never does anything without personal benefit and, as much as he wants a Nobel Peace Prize, money is the thing that matters most.

Astute readers will harken back to February when Trump announced his brilliant idea for the future of Gaza. In essence, it called for the removal of Palestinians in the territory and its handover to the US, with Trump in charge. Trump and his friends would then turn Gaza into some sort of resort area, filled with hotels and attractions. What was to happen to the Palestinians was conveniently forgotten.

Trump, it must also be remembered is a close friend and ally of Israel’s own version of himself, Benjamin Netanyahu. So, it should come as no surprise that the US remained silent as what was a justified response to a horrific terrorist attack eventually lost all sense of proportionality and became obviously aimed at forcing as many Palestinians to leave Gaza as possible. But in the middle of all the violence and diplomatic manoeuvring, the original Trump scheme for Gaza left the public’s consciousness.

But it’s important to remember that it never left Trump’s consciousness.

The Trump/Kushner Scheme

Earlier, on 15 February 2024, Jared Kushner gave a revealing interview (at Harvard) in which he spoke of the value of Gaza’s waterfront and floated ideas of moving people to make redevelopment possible. (All quotes from here: The Guardian)

Some of Kushner’s more provocative lines:

• “Gaza’s waterfront property … it could be very valuable … if people would focus on building up livelihoods.”

• “From Israel’s perspective, I would do my best to move the people out and then clean it up.”

• He suggested moving civilians from Gaza to the Negev (in southern Israel) or — with diplomacy — into Egypt (e.g., via border crossings into Egypt) as part of cleanup operations.

• On return: “I don’t think that Israel has stated that they don’t want the people to move back there afterwards.” (i.e. allowing return was ambiguous)

• He also explicitly questioned the viability of a Palestinian state, calling it “a super bad idea” that would “reward an act of terror.”

The GREAT Trust Plan

• On 29 August 2025, reporting surfaced on a leaked/insider plan called the Gaza Reconstitution, Economic Acceleration and Transformation Trust (GREAT Trust). (A story broken by the Washington Post) That plan included:

  
  • A U.S.-administered trusteeship for about 10 years.
  • “Voluntary relocation” of Gaza’s entire population either abroad (Egypt, Jordan) or into secured zones during reconstruction.
  • Incentives: payments, rent subsidies, cash, digital tokens for property redevelopment rights, etc.
  • Reconstruction centered on tourism, tech, “Gaza Trump Riviera,” smart cities, etc.
  • In the plan, Israel would maintain “overarching rights to meet its security needs” in the first year; internal security would rely on Western/third-country contractors.
  • The plan does not explicitly reference Palestinian statehood; it conceives of a reformed Palestinian polity eventually taking over but under the Abraham Accords framework.

• The Washington Post reported that some of the plan’s authors were Israeli business figures and former Trump aides; the Boston Consulting Group (BCG) had been involved in financial models (though BCG later denied official endorsement).

The current accord is the perfect delivery vehicle for Trump’s larger scheme.

Overview: What is the “Trump” plan?

• On September 29, 2025, Trump and Netanyahu unveiled a 20-point Gaza peace plan meant to end the war and set Gaza’s postwar order. Reuters

• The plan is structured in phases (or “stages”) — starting with ceasefire and hostage exchanges, then moving to security, demilitarization, governance, reconstruction, and long-term arrangements. Council on Foreign Relations

• Trump says this is his signature foreign policy achievement, capable of making him a major Middle East mediator. PBS

But many parts are ambiguous, contested, or aspirational.

What has been implemented (Phase 1 so far)

This is where the plan has made its strongest public steps.

Ceasefire & Hostage / Prisoner Exchange

• Israel and Hamas agreed to Phase 1 of the plan: a formal pause in hostilities, a trooper withdrawal to “agreed lines,” and the exchange of hostages and prisoners. Reuters

• All living Israeli hostages (20 in recent reports) were released. CBS News

• Israel, in return, released about 2,000 Palestinian prisoners / detainees (including some long-term ones). Reuters

• Some (but not all) bodies of deceased hostages have also been turned over; this remains a sticking point. Reuters

• Israel’s troops are pulling back to predetermined lines (with initial withdrawal in Phase 1) and freezing frontlines to stabilize the situation. Council on Foreign Relations

Humanitarian Access & Aid

• The plan calls for a substantial increase in humanitarian deliveries. For example, “600 trucks per day” is cited as a planned target for aid entering Gaza. Reuters

• Reconstruction relief, restoring water, power, sewage, roads, clearing rubble, are part of the early demands. Council on Foreign Relations

Governance & Transitional Oversight

• The plan envisions a postwar governance structure called a “Board of Peace”, to be chaired by Trump, possibly including figures like Tony Blair. Reuters

• Under that body, Gaza would be run by technocratic / transitional arrangements under international oversight. Reuters

Phased Israeli Withdrawal

• The plan map suggests three stages of withdrawal: from ~53% control to 40% then 15%, finally leaving a security perimeter. Council on Foreign Relations

• In other words: Israel keeps control over key buffer zones or security areas even as much of Gaza is handed back. Council on Foreign Relations

What comes next (Phases 2, 3, etc.) — what’s promised, what’s speculative

After Phase 1, the plan envisions further steps that more deeply reshape Gaza’s security, governance, and economic future. Below is the projected outline and the areas of high risk / ambiguity.

Phase 2: Demilitarization & Security Measures

• Hamas is expected to disarm (voluntarily or be disarmed). Trump has warned disarmament “quickly and perhaps violently” if Hamas resists. Reuters

• Deployment of an international stabilization / peacekeeping force, likely involving U.S., Arab, and European partners, to monitor the truce and enforce security. CBS News

• Training of Palestinian police forces (Egypt, Jordan, or Arab states involved) to take over internal security in non-military areas. CBS News

• Israel continuing withdrawals, tied to benchmarks in disarmament and security readiness. CSIS

Phase 3: Governance & Reconstruction

• The “Board of Peace / transitional authority” assumes more administrative control of Gaza: infrastructure, services, rebuilding, land management. Council on Foreign Relations

• Massive reconstruction financed by Gulf states, international donors, private investment. Council on Foreign Relations

• Rebuilding “smart cities,” roads, utilities, hospitals, housing — essentially transforming Gaza’s physical layout. PBS

• Gradual transfer of authority (if conditions met) to a reformed Palestinian governance entity (e.g. the PA) under oversight. Council on Foreign Relations

Phase 4 (Long Term / Final Settlement)

• A long-term security arrangement: Israel retains the right to intervene if renewed threats emerge. Council on Foreign Relations

• Possible normalization steps: border control, trade, connectivity, integration with West Bank or outside markets. CSIS

• Conditional movement toward Palestinian statehood or political recognition (though in the publicly circulated plan, this is vague). Council on Foreign Relations

How this connects with the “resort/relocation/redevelopment” ideas

• The technocratic transitional authority / Board of Peace concept gives a mechanism to bypass traditional Palestinian political actors (Hamas, even the PA). That authority could, behind diplomatic legitimacy, control land, contracts, zoning, redevelopment decisions. Trump himself is “chairman” of this board.

• The staged Israeli withdrawal (leaving buffer zones, security perimeters, Israeli “control” in key regions) echoes the idea of a demographically reworked Gaza where municipal or urban cores become “investment zones” while some populations remain pushed to peripheral or resettled areas.

• The displaced populations from the war may be channeled into “restricted zones” during reconstruction, or offered “voluntary relocation” as part of resettlement programs (as we saw in leaked plans) — the peace plan gives no strong guarantee of full return.

• The reconstruction push gives enormous power over which developers, foreign or domestic, get contracts — opening the door to Gulf or Israeli firms to dominate the rebuilt Gaza.

• The disarmament and security phase gives justification to lean heavily on external security forces and oversight, thereby limiting local armed resistance to redevelopment plans.

• The plan leaves open the Israeli “right to intervene” or retain security control in the final settlement, which can be used to enforce the new order.

The Trump Scheme

It appears that this much-ballyhooed “peace deal” is anything but. Indeed, it appears to be the first phase in the Trump/Kushner/Netenyahu plan to push the Palestinians out of Gaza and transform it into something more akin to Trump’s failed empire in Atlantic City. This should come as absolutely no surprise to anyone who has followed Trump’s public utterances on the Palestinian issue. The United States is rabidly pro-Israel and does not support the increasing international consensus favouring a two-state solution. Indeed, the Israeli government lost no time in proclaiming victory after the ceasefire was announced.

Of course, it is possible that Trump has brought a lasting, equitable peace to Gaza, which may lead to a broader settlement, but I seriously doubt it. Trump doesn’t exactly have a record of a;truism and almost always acts in his own self-interest. The brains behind this scheme is surely Jared Kushner, with his deep ties to Arab Gulf money and his oft-stated antipathy towards the Palestinians in general.

Unfortunately, it appears that the international community, in its haste to grasp at any straw that may lead to peace and in its relief at a ceasefire in Gaza that may hold, has fallen for Trump’s manoeuvring hook, line, and sinker. World leaders were lining up to curry favour and to congratulate Trump on his “statesmanship”, ignoring the fact that the agreement was certainly timed to support Trump’s massive lobbying effort for the Nobel Peace Prize. But we must be reminded that we have only seen Phase One of “Trump’s” plan. The follow-on Phases will be implemented under the threat of American military power and with the support of extensive Israeli military support. The international community’s support may well wane after Trump names himself as “Chairman of the Board”, and as the Palestinians are forced out to make room for development conducted by Trump’s friends and supporters.

There is something rotten here and we would do well to be leery of American motives. They are not an honest broker and we should not be viewing the US as such. That being said, the conflict is so protracted and has occupied so much of the international community’s attention that the world’s political leadership may be willing to grasp at any straw to find a solution - even if that straw is a completely corrupt US administration.