What if paradise was built on a graveyard? Controversial “Trump Riviera” plans for postwar Gaza are stirring outrage. Discover how a former State Department official is exposing a disturbing shift towards corporate colonialism in the region. Will the voices of Palestinians be heard in these critical discussions?
Recent discussions involving former President Donald Trump, Jared Kushner, and Tony Blair reveal controversial postwar plans for Gaza, including a “Trump Riviera,” sparking widespread criticism regarding the future of the beleaguered territory.
These high-level meetings, occurring as Israel intensifies its military operations in Gaza City, reportedly involved Israeli business leaders and financial models from Boston Consulting Group, aiming to transform Gaza’s landscape. The proposed projects, such as a luxurious “Trump Riviera” and an “Elon Musk” manufacturing zone, suggest a vision of economic exploitation amidst profound human suffering.
Former State Department official Josh Paul, who resigned over increased arms sales to Israel, vehemently opposes these schemes, labeling them a shift from traditional Israeli colonialism to a more insidious corporate form. Paul, now a director at A New Policy, argues such initiatives would “exploit incredible suffering for economic gain,” highlighting a disturbing pattern of prioritizing profit over human dignity.
The concept of Gaza as valuable real estate is not new; Jared Kushner previously praised its “very valuable waterfront property,” while Trump himself once promoted an AI-generated video envisioning “Trump Gaza” as a luxury resort. These past statements underscore a consistent, deeply concerning view of Gaza’s future without considering the indigenous Palestinian population.
Paul further criticized the exclusion of Palestinians from these pivotal discussions, drawing parallels to the “Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine” principle. He asserts that the current approach is designed to impose undemocratic, autocratic governance structures, facilitating corporate and potentially Emirati colonialism, which would segment Palestinians into “manageable groups.”
Against this backdrop, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza continues to escalate, with daily casualties and intensified Israeli operations. The proposed “Gaza Humanitarian Foundation” (GHF) is seen by critics as a mechanism for implementing these colonial plans, potentially involving American mercenaries, further complicating the already dire situation and raising questions about international complicity.
The unfolding situation also illuminates shifts within US foreign policy circles, evidenced by former National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan’s expressed support for withholding military aid to Israel, and a State Department spokesperson admitting Israel committed war crimes in Gaza. These reversals, however, come after prolonged periods of defending Israeli actions, prompting former officials like Paul to lament the earlier disregard for critical facts.
Ultimately, the ongoing conflict and any future plans for Gaza remain inextricably linked to the political interests of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Despite internal pressures, his refusal to agree to a lasting ceasefire perpetuates unimaginable suffering, not only for Palestinians but also for Israel and the United States, given its deep involvement and complicity.
