Nearly two years into a devastating conflict that has left the Gaza Strip in ruins and its population scattered, a reported proposal by US President Donald Trump’s administration has triggered a storm of condemnation and concern across the Palestinian territories and the broader Arab world. According to The Washington Post, the White House is considering a sweeping plan that would see the United States take control of Gaza, relocate its population, and ultimately transform the battered enclave into a high-tech and tourism hub—an idea that has drawn fierce opposition from Palestinian leaders and ordinary citizens alike.
The plan, as detailed in a 38-page prospectus obtained by The Washington Post, envisions Gaza, home to roughly two million people, becoming a US-administered trusteeship for at least a decade. The proposal, informally dubbed the GREAT Trust—short for Gaza Reconstitution, Economic Acceleration and Transformation Trust—would grant landowners digital tokens in exchange for the right to develop their property. These tokens could be redeemed for apartments in one of six to eight new “AI-powered, smart cities” planned for the territory, or used to start a new life elsewhere.
But the most contentious aspect of the plan is its call for the temporary—if not permanent—relocation of Gaza’s entire population. The outline suggests that residents could either “voluntarily” depart to other countries or be moved into restricted, secured zones within Gaza itself. The stated goal, according to the prospectus, is to pave the way for a complete transformation of the territory into what Trump first described in February as “the Riviera of the Middle East.”
The reaction from Hamas, the de facto governing authority in Gaza, was swift and unequivocal. On Monday, September 1, 2025, Bassem Naim, a senior member of the group’s political bureau, declared, “Gaza is not for sale. Gaza is... part of the greater Palestinian homeland.” Naim’s remarks, reported by Arab News and echoed by other Palestinian outlets, underline the deep sense of attachment many Gazans feel to their land—a sentiment forged by decades of conflict, displacement, and hardship.
Another Hamas official, who spoke to AFP on condition of anonymity, dismissed the proposal as “worthless and unjust,” adding, “We reject all these plans that abandon our people and keep the occupier on our land.” This official also noted that no details of the initiative had been communicated to Hamas, fueling suspicions about the proposal’s legitimacy and intent. The US State Department, for its part, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The plan’s publication has struck a particularly raw nerve among Palestinians, many of whom see echoes of the 1948 Nakba—Arabic for “catastrophe”—when hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were forced from their homes during the creation of Israel. The notion of another mass displacement, even if described as “voluntary,” has stoked fears of ethnic cleansing. Legal experts cited by several outlets have warned that forcible relocation on such a scale would violate international law and could be construed as a war crime.
Ordinary Gazans, already reeling from nearly two years of war, have voiced skepticism and anger over the proposal. Qasem Habib, a 37-year-old resident now living in a tent in Gaza City’s Al-Rimal neighborhood, told Arab News, “If they want to help Gaza, the way is known: pressure [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu to stop the war and the killing.” For Habib and many others, the idea of abandoning their homeland is unthinkable. “We were born and raised here,” said Wael Azzam, 60, who currently resides in the Al-Mawasi area near Khan Yunis. “Even without knowing it, it is a failed plan.” Azzam went on to question whether President Trump himself would accept being forced out of his own home—a rhetorical flourish that captures the depth of local opposition.
Still, not every Gazan is categorically opposed to the idea. Ahmed Al-Akkawi, 30, expressed a conditional openness to the plan, provided it would end the fighting and guarantee a chance for a better life. “The plan is excellent if the war stops and we are transferred to European countries to live a normal life, and if guarantees are made to rebuild Gaza,” he said. Such voices, however, appear to be in the minority, with most residents and officials deeply wary of any initiative that would entail further displacement.
The timing of the report is particularly sensitive. As PressTV and other outlets have noted, Israeli military operations in Gaza have only intensified in recent days. On September 1, 2025—the same day Hamas leaders were denouncing the US plan—Israeli tanks pushed deeper into Gaza City, while armored vehicles detonated in the eastern Sheikh Radwan neighborhood destroyed several homes and forced more families to flee. At least 50 Palestinians were killed in airstrikes that day alone, with residential neighborhoods across Gaza City heavily bombed. Since the outbreak of hostilities on October 7, 2023, Israel’s campaign has killed at least 63,557 Palestinians and wounded 160,660 others, according to Palestinian officials.
The broader context of the proposal cannot be ignored. Trump’s vision for Gaza, first floated publicly in February 2025, has been met with near-universal condemnation across the Arab world. For many Palestinians, any effort to force them off their land is not only a violation of their rights but a painful reminder of past traumas. The plan’s promise to turn Gaza into a “tourism magnet and high-tech hub” rings hollow to those who have lost homes, loved ones, and livelihoods in the ongoing conflict.
Moreover, the idea of digital tokens and “AI-powered smart cities” has been met with skepticism in a territory where basic infrastructure—water, electricity, healthcare—has been decimated by war. Critics argue that such futuristic promises are little more than a distraction from the immediate humanitarian crisis facing Gaza’s residents. As one Hamas official put it, “No details of the initiative had been communicated to Hamas,” raising questions about who, if anyone, is actually being consulted in the development of these plans.
International reaction to the reported proposal has been muted so far, with most governments and organizations choosing to withhold comment until more details emerge. However, the plan’s publication has already galvanized Palestinian resistance groups and civil society, with calls for renewed international pressure on Israel to end its military campaign and for the United States to abandon any plans for forced relocation.
As the dust settles over yet another controversial proposal for Gaza’s future, one thing is clear: for the vast majority of Palestinians, the idea of trading their homeland for digital tokens and promises of a high-tech utopia is simply unacceptable. The scars of displacement run deep, and any plan that fails to address the root causes of the conflict—occupation, blockade, and the right of return—seems destined to meet with resistance, both on the ground and in the halls of power.
For now, the fate of Gaza remains as uncertain as ever, caught between the ambitions of outside powers and the unyielding resolve of its people to remain on their land, however battered it may be.