TRUMP'S TAKEOVER OF GAZA AND RIDDING IT OF THE PALESTINIAN RIFFRAFF COULD BE MASSIVELY PROFITABLE FOR THR US AND ITS INVESTORS

Gaza takeover will be a godsend for America

Rather than being ruinously expensive, the redevelopment of the coastal enclave stands to be massively profitable. 

 

By Lawrence Solomon

 

JNS

Feb 13, 2025 

 

Trump's plan would turn the Gaza strip from a terrorist enclave into a massively profitable Mediterranean resort

 

U.S. President Donald Trump’s plans to take over Gaza, resettle its 2 million residents and redevelop the territory have been excoriated in the United States and elsewhere as ruinously expensive and likely to see American troops mired in another conflict. Those criticisms have things entirely backward.

Under Trump’s plan, no troops would be needed. Israel’s military will be taking responsibility for Gaza’s long-term security.

Rather than being ruinously expensive, Gaza’s redevelopment stands to be massively profitable. Those who mock Trump’s assertion that Gaza has the potential to become a “Riviera of the Middle East” ignore the deep pockets and business acumen of those in Trump’s circle.

Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and a Middle East real estate developer, lauded the development potential of Gaza’s Mediterranean coastline in a February 2024 interview with Harvard Middle East Initiative Faculty chairman Tarek Masoud. Kushner’s business associates include the Saudis, Emiratis and Qataris, who have invested a combined $3.5 billion in his Affinity Partners’ investment fund.  According to George Washington University economics professor Joseph Pelzman, author of a detailed plan for Gaza’s redevelopment, Kushner’s investors “are salivating to get in.”

Seconding Kushner’s assessment of Gaza’s development potential is Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, another real-estate developer, and Trump, himself, who considers Gaza prime real estate. The Trump Organization and its partner, Saudi-based Dar Al Arkan, have been developing hotels, luxury apartments and golf courses in Oman, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. 

The value of hotel developments along the Gaza Strip’s 25-mile coastline could amount to tens of billions of dollars, dwarfing the $60 million a year for the estimated 20 years the United Nations says would be required to clear the 50 million tons of rubble left behind by the war.

Once the United States takes the “long-term ownership position” that Trump proposes and offers concessions to bidders in the tourism industry, the Gazan properties would start spinning off massive amounts of lucre. As icing on the cake, the Gaza Riviera would benefit from the 5 million tourists per year who already come to Israel, one of the world’s largest vacation destinations, many of whom may well include Gaza in their itinerary.

Gaza’s inland development would also be profitable, albeit much less so. Development of the areas adjacent to the coast would be driven by the need for housing for the tourist industry’s workforce and facilities for its suppliers. With the rest of Gaza resembling a demolition zone bereft of infrastructure and replete with unexploded ordinance, and with the United Nations estimating that rebuilding homes there will take decades, few would rush to develop communities further inland.

An exception would be Jewish communities.

With the Trump administration viewing Gaza as an “international place where everyone can live,” Israel would be able to right a historic wrong when it forcibly uprooted Jewish communities in Gaza in 2005 in the vain hope that peace would come of unilaterally giving Gaza to the Palestinians. Those uprooted communities could now be re-established, along with needed roads and other infrastructure. No U.S. financial or military commitment would be required; the private sector or the Israeli government would provide the wherewithal. Over time, other communities, including Arab settlements that found financing and were committed to peaceful coexistence with Jews, would also emerge.

Gaza’s petroleum-rich offshore represents another multibillion-dollar bounty for U.S. taxpayers. By awarding mining concessions to America-friendly corporations, the United States would augment America’s energy resources and its treasury.

While the U.S. military wouldn’t be needed to secure Gaza, it would benefit by establishing bases there to complement its facilities in some 20 other Middle East locations, many of which are subject to attack from hostile neighbors. Gaza bases adjacent to Israel, which would share its extensive intelligence, would be subject to far fewer attacks.

Trump expects America to sell Gaza eventually. When that occurs, this Mediterranean Riviera would represent an unparalleled financial windfall for the U.S. Treasury. Whether a country or an Israeli or Arab consortium proves to be the highest bidder, the new owners would want to protect their investment by keeping it a safe venue for tourism. 

Critics of Trump’s plan, such as Houchang E. Chehabi, professor emeritus at Boston University’s Pardee School of Global Studies, condemn the “forced resettlement of 2 million Gazans [as] mind-bogglingly appalling.” They have it backward: It is the Arab countries and others who are forcing Gazans to stay in Gaza, by barring their entry elsewhere. By persuading other countries to accept Gazan immigrants, Trump would be setting Gazans free to leave the uninhabitable calamity that Hamas has brought down on them.

Trump’s plan provides hope for Gazans who seek a brighter future, for Israelis who would finally share a border with a friend and ally, and for Americans who will take pride in turning one of the world’s most vicious terrorist enclaves into a profitable and peaceful oasis.