Published by AstroAwani & BusinessToday, image by BusinessToday.
Just as the collapse of the Assad regime in early December last year was “unanticipated”, Trump’s sudden announcement that the US is interested to take over and rebuild Gaza which entails the displacement of some 1.7-1.8 million Gazans at a joint-press conference with Netanyahu (East Room, White House) on February 4 came as a shock to the world.
Right here we have two pivotal developments (one after the other) – the first anchored in Syria (which borders Israel) and the second relating to Gaza (as an integral and indissoluble part of the State of Palestine) – with the potential to reshape and reconfigure the regional order.
Trump’s ambition and vision to redevelop the Gaza Strip into the Riviera/Monaco of the Eastern Mediterranean/Middle East was hinted at in EMIR Research article, “Egypt, Sinai & Israel’s loss of strategic initiative” (February 3, 2025).
Last year, he repeatedly made public and private comments on the value of Gaza as a prime real estate location. His son-in-law and close confidante Jared Kushner made similar remarks about Gaza’s potential as a site for the development of waterfront properties.
Contrast this with Trump’s proposals in 2016 as part of his presidential campaign. The issue had been raised during a Republican presidential debate to which the then Senator (and now Secretary of State) Marco Rubio responded with the retort that “the Palestinians are not a real estate deal …”.
Back then, Trump had wanted to be that neutral negotiator who would broker a deal with Israel and Palestine. In turn, under this scenario, both countries were expected to reach a deal with one another as embodied by a permanent/lasting peace agreement that’s conditional upon reciprocal compromises (“Trump pledges to be ‘neutral guy’ in Israel-Palestinian negotiations”, CNN, February 19, 2016).
The shift in Trump’s position especially now in his second term could well be attributed to a combination of domestic and external factors – both of which are inextricably intertwined.
Domestically, the Zionist influence on Trump is much more prominent than before with Miriam Adelson alone contributing a staggering USD200 million (cumulative) to his campaigns (2020, 2024).
Externally, the situation for Israel has become acutely desperate and feverish (one and the same time, simultaneously) with the events of October 7 speeding up the timeline of developments, i.e., for Netanyahu to put off the two-state solution indefinitely as the “implicit” or assumed goal.
The status quo and “equilibrium” in the strategic order have been disturbed and upset by Hamas’s bold and daring incursion into southern Israel. This means both a threat and opportunity to the Zionist entity. The threat from the southern front embodied by Gaza must be eliminated so that degrading terrorist infrastructure no longer works.
This creates the opportunity of destroying Gaza and displacing its residents with the aim of enabling a (slow) genocide and the remaking of the Strip.
The latter limb/part of the opportunity came to be partly envisioned (as one alternative/option) in the cunning Gaza 2030/35 Plan (see “From crisis to prosperity: Netanyahu’s vision for Gaza 2035 revealed online”, Jerusalem Post, May 3, 2024) which envisions transforming this part of the State of Palestine into an economic base including as a regional port linked to the futuristic NEOM city project in Saudi Arabia – the economic hinterland.
These developments were to intersect with the stunning return of Trump to the White House.
As it is, with Trump’s announcement, it now appears that the Gaza 2030/35 Plan is dead in the water.
But so too is the two-state solution.
Trump’s Gaza (pipe) dream equals the demise of the Palestinians’ forlorn hope for an independent homeland as the very compromise they have long been willing to make (contrary to the vicious lies of Arab rejectionism).
Palestinian compromise has been definitively demonstrated time and again in the form of the Oslo Accords and more contemporaneously the Arab Peace Initiative (which represents the best proposal, moving forward).
Perhaps that’s the intention in the first place? That is, to “kill off” (completely overshadow, put to rest) the pursuit of the two-state solution agenda for good as the “explicit” or confirmed goal?
Only this time with Trump providing the legitimacy for its demise.
Typical of the Zionist proclivity for running off to the US for protection and cover, even if ever so “indirectly” (quote, unquote).
If Trump had his way in translating his (pipe) dream into reality, Gaza might even be renamed as something else.
It’s envisaged that this so-called “prime real estate” will represent a kind of an oasis for the international community.
A wily strategy to turn Gaza into a Western-style cosmopolitan hub – to dilute and diminish the Palestinian (Arab, Islamic identity).
Trump had threatened to cut off aid to Egypt and Jordan should they refuse to cooperate in absorbing the refugees. His joint-press conference with King Abdullah of Jordan on February 12 revealed/indicated very little in terms of the details/specifics, even if incipiently. The White House press statement was very brief and general – focussing mainly on the release of the hostages held by Hamas and the “… temporary pause in hostilities”.
The statement concluded by alluding to Trump’s “… goal of ensuring that Gaza is rebuilt beautifully after the conflict ends, and providing options for the people of Gaza that allow them to live in security and dignity, and free of Hamas’s tyranny [sic]”.
On its part, Egypt will be hosting an emergency Arab summit scheduled on February 27 to discuss the issue of Palestinian displacement.
Whilst Trump’s Gaza (pipe) dream could genuinely have been his own idea, there’s a possibility that it could actually have been Netanyahu’s last-minute intervention. Was it perhaps a sort of belated quid pro quo for the ceasefire deal? Astute observers have pointed out that Trump was atypically reading out from a text.
Be that as it may and regardless, unconditional support for Israel remains inconsistent with Trump’s professed or avowed non-interventionism.
His Gaza (pipe) dream embodies a kind of paradoxical “non-intervention” interventionism (“oxymoron”).
Trump is caught in a web of contradiction. It goes without saying that it’s not in America’s interest to maintain a presence in Gaza, even without American boots on the ground.
That would mean not only the demise of the two-state solution. But concomitantly and perforce, the wanton breaches and flagrant violations of international law as embodied by the will of the United Nations (UN) in their consecutive and respective resolutions throughout the years ever since the inception of the Zionist entity.
It once again reveals how, irrespective of the administration, the Zionist stranglehold on American foreign policy is too deep and entrenched.
If Trump is truly sincere in his goal to dismantle and unseat the Deep State, he should be, among other things, working to break the total grip of AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) and the wider Zionist lobby on American politics which the renowned international relations scholar Professor Dr John Mearsheimer has extensively analysed about in his notable book, The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy (2007).
Trump should be pulling the US out of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) instead of withdrawing from the Paris Accords and the UN Human Rights Council, as examples.
Rather than reversing course, the US via Trump is being drawn ever deeper by Netanyahu (out of sheer desperation to protect his own legacy), no less, into his delusional and genocidal messianic vision to reshape the Middle East.
The Gaza plan (in the current form) – whether Trump’s inspiration or Netanyahu’s – is dangerous and counter-productive. It’s merely another recipe for regional instability.
For Netanyahu, American presence in Gaza would provide the much coveted new “strategic depth”.
This time the US will have a visible physical presence – at the forefront – in Gaza (whether military or non-military). It’ll serve as a deterrence against the realisation of an all-out multi-front war – especially symmetrical.
If at all, American military presence will most likely occur in response to the threats of a symmetrical multi-front war.
American visible presence is aimed at pre-empting an invasion of Israel – just like it did to Saudi Arabia after Kuwait was invaded by Saddam Hussein in 1990.
US as the security shield and protector of Israel would become even more prominent now.
Is the Gaza (pipe) dream part of Netanyahu’s “trap” to draw (lure), co-opt and assimilate the US into directly sharing Israel’s security burden and liability upfront, i.e., on the frontline?
Is the US sleepwalking into a Third “Gulf War” or rather a Middle East Armageddon in the future?
Trump has, in effect, self-imposed the US with very little wriggle room around.
Instead of America First, Americans, including MAGA supporters, can now see clearly that it’s all about Israel First. The mass media, including social, have highlighted an awakening of sorts or at least grave discomfort or even outright rejection of Trump’s Gaza (pipe) dream among many MAGA supporters.
More importantly and pertinently is the need to put the agenda for a two-state solution back into the limelight.
It’s expected that the emergency Arab summit to be hosted by Egypt will do precisely that and, not least, unequivocally reject Trump’s Gaza (pipe) dream based on a coordinated and united/unified regional response.
This also entails that any “alternative” plan must be conditioned on an unabashed and strong reaffirmation of the Palestinian right to self-determination.
Lastly, it’s clear the Gazans will not be budged and forced out of their land (permanent or not). Despite the unrelenting bombardment and horrific toll suffered, the Gazans haven’t capitulated or surrendered, let alone be the party to their own ethnic cleansing and genocide.
The Gazans will never ever give up and leave their homeland.
No matter what.
It’s supremely ironic, then, that in Trump’s description (“admission”?) that Gaza is a demotion site lies the answer for him, if only he’s open to acknowledging it.
Jason Loh Seong Wei is Head of Social, Law & Human Rights at EMIR Research, an independent think tank focussed on strategic policy recommendations based on rigorous research.
