On Feb. 4, in a White House press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, President Trump proposed that the U.S. should take over Gaza and turn it into a Mediterranean resort. Billing it “Trump Gaza,” he said that the 2 million Palestinians currently living there would and should willingly vacate their homeland, insisting that Egypt and Jordan would accept them.
Despite widespread objections, on Feb. 26, Trump doubled down, posting an AI-generated video on his Truth Social platform titled “Trump Gaza.” It depicted a vibrant resort complete with bearded belly dancers, and Trump and Netanyahu bare-chested poolside in the “Gaza Riviera.” This virtual reality conceals a different, more violent picture — for Palestinians, the Middle East and America.
Trump’s insistence that Egypt and Jordan would take them is false. The two countries have rejected this forced displacement plan, emphasizing that it would lead to regional instability and violate international norms. Trump’s plan is viewed as a security threat that would expand the Israeli-Palestinian conflict into their territory, putting at risk the peace agreements in place for decades between Egypt, Jordan and Israel.
The Arab League also denounced the proposal, warning that it could exacerbate tensions in the region and undermine efforts toward a two-state solution. The Arab states launched an alternative plan that hinges on a two-state solution, but Trump continues to stay the course, stating, “It’s going to be… magnificent for the Palestinians. They’re going to be in love with it.”
Even if there were somewhere for Palestinians to go, forcing 2 million people to leave their homeland en masse would present alarming optics. For the U.S., it would conjure visions of the Japanese internment camps during World War II and the Trail of Tears’ violent forced displacement of Native Americans. This would reinforce the already highly negative global perceptions of Israel, and pull the U.S. further into that orbit.
And the U.S.-Israel coalition’s treatment of Palestinians and unwillingness to engage in good-faith diplomacy and peaceful solutions would deal a major, perhaps final blow to U.S. “soft” power in the Middle East. That leaves only the threat of coercion on the table, with all of its risks. This is a heavy price to pay for a real estate deal.
Beyond the moral catastrophe, “Trump Gaza” would dramatically accelerate global security risks. There is no doubt Palestinians would resist the action physically and diplomatically, as they have for decades. Displacing millions of Palestinians would provide a powerful recruitment tool for extremist groups in the region and in the U.S.
Palestinians in Egypt and Jordan would organize attempts to return, potentially leading to border skirmishes that could pull Egypt into a direct military confrontation with Israel for the first time since the Yom Kippur War. Jordan would be at even higher risk, with U.S. forces based in the country potentially coming under attack.
The billions invested into the proposed resort — built on the destruction of countless lives, homes and generations of history — would be an obvious and symbolic target, almost certainly requiring U.S. military protection, either through yet further military support to Israel, U.S. boots on the ground or both.
Our involvement in such an unpopular endeavor would further stress already under-manned U.S. forces. Despite lowered enlistment standards, the U.S. Army is still 12,000 troops short, the Air Force lacks 2,000 pilots and the Navy cannot man its ships. Meanwhile, Trump has floated other reckless proposals, including making Canada the 51st U.S. state, “purchasing” or otherwise securing Greenland, and retaking the Panama Canal.
While these comments have been dismissed as rhetoric by pundits, Canada and Denmark, who are NATO allies, and Panama are treating Trump’s comments as what they are — threats to their sovereignty. Despite thorough rebukes from allied leaders, the president’s hair-trigger personality could easily lead to military escalation and entrenchment on multiple fronts.
The military, struggling to recruit, would be spread thin along our borders in direct engagement with former allies. Whoever is left would be deployed to Gaza, to enforce the forced displacement and protect billions in assets.
And although the president has said Israel could do the job for the U.S., this is an Israeli military that has failed to topple Hamas after 15 months of all-out war on Gaza. Instead, they have turned Gaza into rubble, further besieged it, and been forced to sign a ceasefire as all attempts to seize control of the strip have failed.
While directly attacking our allies is new, the Gaza playbook is something the American people have seen before. The Middle East has been a volatile region for decades. In just the past two decades, the U.S. lost two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan at huge costs in blood and treasure. It seems almost inevitable that should this plan go through, it could lead to a third, with devastating consequences given that the U.S. military is undermanned and the nation is $35 trillion in debt.
This plan would risk inflaming the entire region and beyond. There is a not small chance that Iran, Russia and China could get involved to oppose the U.S. and Israel, inflaming tensions with the potential for a nuclear exchange. None of this bodes well for the golden “Trump Gaza” portrayed in the president’s video.
All this begs the question — what strategic advantage does the U.S. and its people accrue as a result of Trump’s plan and the unquestioning support of Israel? This path has many scenarios, but all roads lead to the same result — loss. Loss of life, loss of land, loss of national and international security, and loss of U.S. power and credibility — all while the Trump administration seems hellbent on alienating traditional and loyal allies.
This profile in arrogance serves only to make the indispensable nation the indefensible nation.
Maj. Gen. (Ret.) Dennis Laich served in the U.S. Army for more than 35 years, in Iraq, Kuwait, Germany, Honduras and the Netherlands. He is the author of “Skin in the Game: Poor Kids and Patriots.”
