President Donald Trump has announced an extraordinary plan for the United States to take over and “own” Gaza, claiming that his administration would spearhead a redevelopment effort to transform the war-ravaged Palestinian enclave into “the Riviera of the Middle East.”
Trump’s remarks, made during a press briefing at the White House following talks with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, have upended decades of U.S. foreign policy and triggered widespread condemnation, with many likening the proposal to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Trump’s plan, which he said would involve the forced resettlement of Palestinians elsewhere, has raised fresh concerns over the president’s increasingly expansionist rhetoric. His comments come amid a series of statements in which he has expressed a desire for the U.S. to annex Canada as its 51st state, purchase Greenland from Denmark, and even take control of the Panama Canal.
Register for Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 16 (Feb 10 – May 3, 2025) today for early bird discounts.
Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass opens registrations.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and co-invest in great global startups.
Register to become a better CEO or Director with Tekedia CEO & Director Program.
Many see these pronouncements as part of a broader pattern of aggressive geopolitical posturing that has drawn comparisons to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s moves in Crimea and eastern Ukraine.
During his press conference, Trump did not hold back in his vision for Gaza, describing the war-torn territory as a land of untapped potential that could be transformed under U.S. ownership.
“The U.S. will take over the Gaza Strip, and we will do a job with it, too. We’ll own it,” he declared, adding that his administration would oversee the clearance of bombed-out buildings, unexploded ordnance, and other remnants of war.
He spoke in grandiose terms about making Gaza an international hub, attracting people from all over the world.
“I think you will make that into an international, unbelievable place. I think the potential in the Gaza Strip is unbelievable. And I think the entire world – representatives from all over the world will be there, and they’ll live there. Palestinians also. Palestinians will live there,” Trump said. “Many people will live there.”
His statement, however, lacked specifics on implementation, particularly on what would happen to the nearly 2.3 million Palestinians who currently reside in the enclave. While he suggested that some would be resettled in “countries of interest with humanitarian hearts,” there was no clear plan for how this mass displacement would occur or where the displaced Palestinians would go.
Trump also did not rule out deploying U.S. troops to Gaza to enforce security. He said: “As far as Gaza is concerned, we’ll do what is necessary. If it’s necessary, we’ll do that.”
This remark further fueled speculation that his plan could involve direct military intervention, making it one of the most radical foreign policy proposals by a former or sitting U.S. president in recent history.
Fierce Global Backlash
Trump’s statement has drawn global condemnation, especially from Palestinians. Hamas, the group governing Gaza, issued a strong statement rejecting the plan, calling it “a recipe for creating chaos and tension in the region.” The group warned that any attempt to displace Palestinians would be met with fierce resistance, emphasizing that they had already endured over 15 months of bombardment without surrendering their homeland.
“Our people in the Gaza Strip will not allow these plans to pass,” Hamas said. “What is required is an end to the occupation and aggression against our people, not their expulsion from their land. Our people in Gaza have thwarted displacement and deportation plans under bombardment for more than 15 months.”
Beyond Palestinian resistance, many believe the idea that the U.S. could claim sovereignty over Gaza while forcefully displacing its people mirrors the logic Putin used to justify his annexation of Crimea in 2014 and his ongoing military campaign to seize Ukrainian territories.
Political analysts have pointed out that Trump’s rhetoric is consistent with a pattern of expansionist ambitions he has voiced before. His push to make Canada the 51st U.S. state, his attempt to buy Greenland from Denmark, and his reported interest in taking over the Panama Canal all paint a picture of a leader eager to redraw international borders to suit American interests.
“This is Trump’s Crimea moment,” said Omar Baddar, a political analyst and human rights advocate. “He’s essentially saying that, officially, U.S. policy now is the destruction of Palestinian society, the scattering of Palestinians to neighboring countries, and on top of that, for the U.S. to come and own Palestinian territory indefinitely.”
Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib, a Palestinian American and a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, criticized the idea as a blatant violation of Palestinian sovereignty. “Gaza is not a real estate development project for the United States government to own or take over,” he wrote on X. “Gaza belongs to the Palestinian people.”
Democratic Lawmakers and U.S. Allies React
In Washington, Trump’s proposal was met with sharp criticism from Democratic lawmakers. Representative Rashida Tlaib, the only Palestinian American in Congress, accused Trump of advocating ethnic cleansing while standing beside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whom she called a “genocidal war criminal.”
“He’s perfectly fine cutting off working Americans from federal funds while the funding to the Israeli government continues flowing,” Tlaib wrote on X.
Senator Chris Murphy dismissed Trump’s remarks as a transparent distraction from his own legal troubles and failures as a leader.
“I have news for you – we aren’t taking over Gaza,” Murphy said. “But the media and the chattering class will focus on it for a few days, and Trump will have succeeded in distracting everyone from the real story – the billionaires seizing government to steal from regular people.”
Internationally, U.S. allies have largely remained silent, but Arab nations have made their opposition clear. Egypt and Jordan, which have already refused Trump’s earlier calls to accept displaced Palestinians, reiterated their position that any forced resettlement would destabilize the region. Saudi Arabia also stated it would oppose any attempt to displace Palestinians and reaffirmed its stance that normalizing relations with Israel would only happen if a Palestinian state was established.
Jean-Loup Samaan, a senior research fellow at the National University of Singapore’s Middle East Institute, speculated that Trump’s comments might be part of a strategic maneuver rather than a genuine policy proposal.
“Domestically, it also goes against the ‘America First’ rhetoric: this would amount to a new massive U.S. nation-building enterprise in the Middle East, which is probably not something American voters had in mind during the last election,” he told Al Jazeera.
A Dangerous Precedent for Global Politics
As Trump’s remarks continue to reverberate worldwide, many are questioning what his vision for U.S. expansionism could mean for global politics. His statements on Gaza, Canada, Greenland, and the Panama Canal indicate a broader willingness to challenge international norms on sovereignty, potentially emboldening other leaders with similar territorial ambitions.
For Palestinians, the proposal represents yet another existential threat, one that could see them permanently displaced from their land under the guise of redevelopment. For the international community, it signals the alarming possibility that an American leader could advocate policies that resemble the aggressive territorial expansionism the U.S. has repeatedly condemned in other nations.
While the feasibility of Trump’s Gaza takeover remains questionable, the mere fact that a U.S. president could make such a proposal is enough to raise profound concerns about the future of U.S. foreign policy and the stability of the Middle East. If anything, Trump’s remarks have made it clear that the global order may be facing an era of renewed territorial ambitions—ones that challenge the very foundation of international law and state sovereignty.