White House distances itself from Trump's controversial plan to "rebuild" Gaza

In an unexpected turn of events during his speech – the most surprising by an American president on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – Trump said that the Gazan population would be expelled from the Strip while the area is rebuilt, and that the territory should become the “Riviera of the Middle East”. The statement, which sparked international controversy, was accompanied by reactions from key figures in the region. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was reported to have been unable to hide his smile upon hearing the proposal, which created even more uproar among the various actors in the conflict.

 

Several close advisers to the administration indicated that the idea of ​​a “long-term ownership” of Gaza was already beginning to fade in the face of the obvious unviability of the project. In fact, following the alarm generated internationally, senior officials attempted to modify and soften the president’s initial approaches. The White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, explained in statements that they were “working on qualifying the president’s position regarding the relocation of Palestinians and the use of American troops,” in an attempt to attenuate the impact of the proposal.

 

For his part, Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the project in such a forceful way that, reportedly, “not even the Republican tycoon could have done better”:Make Gaza Great Again“,” he posted on social media. Rubio reportedly clarified that “what the president is proposing is to clear and rebuild Gaza, not to assume total control of it,” trying to emphasize that the idea did not include a military occupation or a direct economic commitment from the United States.

 

In private meetings with Republican senators, the special envoy for the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, said that “Trump does not want to put American troops on the ground, nor does he want to spend American dollars in Gaza,” according to a senator present at the meetings. These statements reflect the administration’s attempt to distance itself from a policy that many consider unworkable and dangerous.

 

Insiders revealed that even basic studies to assess the plan’s feasibility had not been carried out, and that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was informed of the proposal just minutes before a joint press conference scheduled for Tuesday. Some experts went so far as to call the idea “so far-fetched” that it could simply be a negotiating tactic.

 

The international reaction was swift: while the Arab world, including Saudi Arabia – a key US ally – strongly condemned the initiative, the proposal was greeted with enthusiasm by sections of the Israeli right and by certain pro-Israel groups in the United States. In Gaza, however, the response was a mix of condemnation and bewilderment at the possibility of a massive displacement of the population.

 

In addition to the humanitarian and political challenges, experts have stressed that transforming Gaza into what Trump called the “Riviera of the Middle East” would be an extraordinarily long, costly and, in the worst case, a process that violates international law.

 

With domestic support withdrawn and international criticism mounting, Trump's controversial proposal appears to have cooled, leaving the consequences of an initiative that, beyond its ambitions, has made clear the divisions both within the US administration and on the regional geopolitical scene.