Donald Trump’s proposal for a US takeover of Gaza was met with blunt rejection from regional allies, delight from Israel’s far right and warnings against “ethnic cleansing.”

A broad wave of international outrage and condemnation followed Trump’s shock announcement after a meeting with the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.

For all its grandiosity, the US President’s vision raises several critical questions about feasibility.

Trump’s extraordinary proposal casts a pall of uncertainty over the next round of negotiations to extend the fragile ceasefire between Israel and Hamas.

Trump’s comments, which came at the start of negotiations for a second stage of the ceasefire deal in Gaza, sparked fears that they could threaten talks, although the framework deal defers any long-term planning for Gaza’s future to a third stage.

The initial 42-day truce, which will see the release of 33 Israeli captives and nearly 2,000 Palestinian prisoners, expires on March 1, 2025.

Earlier on Tuesday, February 4, 2025, a spokesperson for the Palestinian group Hamas said that negotiations for a second phase of the ceasefire had begun. If agreed to, that phase would see the full withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza and the freeing of all captives.

Trump on Tuesday cast doubt on the strength of the agreement and the likelihood it would last. “The strikes could start tomorrow. There’s not a lot left to strike,” he stated.

Meanwhile, Netanyahu heaped praise on Trump at the news conference where he disclosed his redevelopment plan for Gaza, saying, “We will not only win the war working together, we will win the peace with your leadership.”

He iterated that Israel has three goals: Destroy Hamas’s military and governing capabilities, secure the release hostages, and ensure that Gaza never again poses a threat to Israel.

“Your willingness to puncture conventional thinking – thinking that has failed time and time and time again – your willingness to think outside the box with fresh ideas, will help us achieve all these goals, and I’ve seen you do this many times.

“You cut to the chase. You see things others refuse to see. You say things others refuse to say. And after the jaws drop, people scratch their heads, and they say, ‘You know, he’s right’.”
Benjamin Netanyahu

Itamar Ben-Gvir suggested Trump’s proposal would effectively negate the need for ceasefire talks, which have been overshadowed from the start by lack of any Israeli plans for post-conflict Gaza. “The only solution to Gaza is to encourage the migration of Gazans … this is the strategy for the ‘day after’,” Ben-Gvir said.

The Israeli public, as well as the Israeli government, received Trump’s calls to displace Palestinians from Gaza well. A survey that was done early this week, published in Israeli media, found that 80 percent of respondents supported removing – forcibly displacing – Gaza’s population outside of its land.

Only politicians from Israel’s relatively small leftwing parties openly opposed Trump’s proposals, with Gilad Kariv from the Democrats party describing it as “a nightmare for Israel” and Ayman Odeh from the Joint List warning that “a transfer will not happen and will not bring security.”

Trump’s Proposal Deemed A Distraction

According to Chris Murphy, a Democratic Senator for Connecticut, said Trump’s proposal was an attempt to distract from controversies at home. “I have news for you – we aren’t taking over Gaza,” Murphy said on X.

“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.”
Chris Murphy

Trump wants neighbouring countries that are heavily dependent on US aid and military support, including Egypt and Jordan, to offer new homes to large numbers of Gaza’s 2.3 million residents. These countries were quick to reject Trump’s Plan.

The US President had anticipated and shrugged off these refusals in advance, perhaps confident that both countries are vulnerable because of their reliance on American money and weapons.