The South African government has condemned Israel’s renewed aerial attacks on Gaza that have claimed hundreds of lives and shattered a truce agreed two months ago. Photo: Fadi Alwhidi/Anadolu via Getty Images
It is difficult to know where to start with US President Donald Trump’s belief that the solution to the Middle East conflict is to forcibly displace Gaza’s bombed and beleaguered population, rather than address the illegal occupation of Palestinian land.
Arab nations such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan have bitterly criticised his plan to transform Gaza into hotels and apartments, which is not only silly but also unjust. A harsh truth behind this stunning concept is a ravaged country, a tortured people and a politically dangerous territory begging for answers.
The idea that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can only be “controlled” has been debunked. One must truly be committed to justice, rebuilding and a practical approach towards peace — not derisory plans that exacerbate hardship and chaos.
There was a clear power dynamic at the press conference where Trump presented his Gaza plan. He stood on one side, enjoying an electoral victory, ruthlessly controlling every US government department and exuding assurance in his power to act unilaterally. On the other side stood Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, politically weakened, struggling to maintain cohesion in his cabinet, and grappling with the consequences of his aggressive policies against Hezbollah and Iran.
Trump sees Gaza as a huge real estate possibility where commerce and money can address long-standing political difficulties. This reflects a transactional perspective on the world. A radical alternative would be appealing to someone outside the political sphere who is disillusioned by years of unsuccessful diplomacy.
Now a barren wilderness, Gaza is a location where a people is going through unspeakable pain. The concept of turning it into a booming, safe centre similar to Beirut when it was known as the Riviera of the Mediterranean, appeals only on the surface level. This idea overlooks the complicated situations of Palestinian aspirations, occupation and displacement.
It dismisses the moral and legal obligations and reduces a very political and human rights tragedy. Trump’s strategy runs the risk of magnifying the very issues it purports to fix. Gaza is rich in history, politics and lived experiences; it is not a blank canvas or a fresh frontier. The idea of removing Palestinians from Gaza as a simple logistical exercise is reminiscent of past forced relocations in cruelty. To grasp the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, one has to admit the lasting effect of the Nakba, a tragedy that helped to define the current reality.
Israel itself emerged from the historical trauma of the Jewish diaspora, while the region’s collective memory is filled with stories of home, exile and forced displacement. This is not a problem solvable by bulldozers or blueprints; it is a deeply human struggle, woven with poetry, longing and the scars of history. Reducing it to a technical challenge ignores the moral and emotional dimensions at its core.
From the outset, Egypt and Jordan made it clear they would not accept refugees from Gaza. Their stance was rooted in a well-founded fear: Palestinians would view any departure as a permanent exile, with little hope of return. Moreover, their own populations would oppose any involvement in such a plan, seeing it as complicity in displacement. This position remains unchanged.
This fear is further justified by the rise of hard-line politics in Israel. Once relegated to the fringes, the ideology of Meir Kahane and his followers — once unthinkable in mainstream Israeli leadership — now holds significant sway in the government, alarming many Israelis.
Extremist settlers, often shielded by the state, systematically terrorise Palestinians in the West Bank, openly aiming to expel them and claim the land exclusively for Jewish Israelis. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, a key figure in Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition, openly advocates for Israeli sovereignty and annexation, further entrenching this agenda.
These developments underscore a dangerous shift, one that threatens any possibility of coexistence and reinforces the urgency of addressing the root causes of the conflict. Is it any surprise that the proposal to forcibly displace Palestinians from Gaza, regardless of the justification, aligns perfectly with the most extreme elements of Israeli political ideology?
The tragedy of the current situation will only deepen if the opportunity for a better alternative is squandered. Saudi Arabia’s swift rejection of Trump’s suggestion underscores this point, reaffirming its “unequivocal rejection of any infringement on the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people” and its commitment to a Palestinian state as a precondition for normalising relations with Israel.
This stance highlights a viable path forward. Trump is correct in one regard: repeating the same failed approaches will only perpetuate endless conflict. The alternative is not forced displacement but the realisation of a two-state solution. A Palestinian state alongside a normalised Israel, supported by a global alliance for peace, offers a sustainable resolution.
Perhaps Trump’s reckless proposal has inadvertently posed a challenge: if his plan is unacceptable, what is the alternative? The answer is clear. It’s time to prioritise justice, dignity and coexistence by advancing the two-state solution — a better option that addresses the root causes of the conflict rather than exacerbating them.
Dr Imran Khalid is a freelance columnist on international affairs based in Karachi, Pakistan.