The Arab Plan, estimating $53 billion for Gaza’s reconstruction, faces criticism for lacking governance details and clarity on Hamas’s future. The White House has rejected the plan, promoting an alternative by President Trump. The proposed rebuilding strategy spans three phases, but skepticism regarding funding and governance remains high.
The Arab Plan for Gaza’s reconstruction estimates a need for $53 billion, as revealed in a recent UN-EU-World Bank report. This comprehensive proposal was discussed at an emergency summit in Cairo, where Arab states supported its execution. However, it has drawn criticism due to its lack of clarity on governance, Hamas’s future, and funding sources, prompting skepticism about its viability.
The White House has dismissed the Arab Plan, with National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes stating, “the current proposal does not address the reality that Gaza is currently uninhabitable.” This highlights the ongoing support for President Trump’s alternative proposal, which envisions transforming Gaza into a luxurious region, often referred to as the “Riviera of the Middle East.”
The Arab Plan outlines a strategic three-phase reconstruction, culminating in 2030. Initially, the first phase will last six months, requiring $3 billion to clear rubble and establish temporary housing for displaced people. The subsequent phase, spanning two years and costing $20 billion, aims to construct housing for 1.6 million individuals along with restoring essential services.
During the final phase, lasting two and a half years at a projected $30 billion, additional housing will be built for another 1.2 million people. These efforts will ultimately enable facilities to support a population of up to 3 million. Notably, the plan does not integrate Hamas into the governance structure, proposing instead a non-factional administrative committee for an initial six-month period.
In summary, while the Arab Plan presents a structured approach to Gaza’s reconstruction, it faces numerous challenges and skepticism regarding governance and funding. The absence of Hamas’s role raises questions about the plan’s feasibility, especially as external actors, including the U.S. and Israel, critique its cohesion and alignment with current realities. Future discussions and international cooperation will be essential for any successful implementation.
Original Source: www.nbcmiami.com
