This article compares two plans for Gaza’s future: Egypt’s comprehensive reconstruction initiative, which focuses on local resettlement and infrastructural support, and Donald Trump’s controversial proposal to evacuate Gaza’s population to establish a U.S.-run area. The Egyptian plan enjoys Arab League endorsement, while Trump’s has encountered skepticism. Both proposals underscore the urgent need for a viable resolution to the Gaza situation.
On March 4, the Arab League convened in Cairo to examine a comprehensive reconstruction plan for Gaza, spearheaded by Egypt. This proposal, costing approximately $53 billion, is detailed in a 112-page document that emphasizes emergency relief, infrastructure rebuilding, and long-term economic development. The plan received endorsement during the summit, although more detailed discussions are necessary for its later stages.
In contrast, on February 4, U.S. President Donald Trump presented a different vision, aiming to transform the Gaza Strip into a U.S.-operated “Riviera of the Middle East.” This proposal controversially included the evacuation of about two million residents to neighboring Arab states. Trump’s approach was met with skepticism and ridicule from the Arab world and beyond, prompting discussions about Gaza’s future.
In response to Trump’s announcement, Egypt outlined an alternative plan, focused on local resettlement rather than relocation. The Egyptian proposal involves creating “secure areas” within Gaza to temporarily house displaced Palestinians while reconstruction efforts are undertaken by both Egyptian and international firms. President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi hailed the unity of Arab countries in supporting this reconstruction plan, which aims to allow Palestinians to remain on their land.
The Egyptian strategy consists of a three-phase plan that spans five years. The initial phase includes a six-month “early recovery period,” costing about $3 billion, where up to 1.5 million displaced Gazans will be relocated into prefabricated units and repaired homes. Subsequently, $20 billion is allocated for restoring housing and utilities in the second phase, followed by a $30 billion investment in infrastructure during the final phase, which entails the construction of an airport, seaports, and industrial zones.
Key to the Egyptian plan is the establishment of a temporary Governance Assistance Mission, excluding Hamas, to manage humanitarian aid and reconstruction until a reformed Palestinian Authority can take over governance. Despite this exclusion, Hamas has expressed support for the Egyptian initiative, recognizing it as an affirmation of Arab solidarity with the Palestinian cause.
During the summit, Arab League Secretary-General Ahmed Aboul Gheit emphasized the necessity of deploying an international peacekeeping force in Gaza, and stated that an international conference would be hosted by Egypt in collaboration with the UN to agree on reconstruction efforts. Development funding is expected to involve contributions from affluent Gulf nations, with a trust fund managed by the World Bank created to handle these financial commitments.
A future phase will focus on forming a sovereign Palestinian state, integrating the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza, drawing insights from Trump’s earlier plan “Peace to Prosperity: A Vision to Improve the Lives of the Palestinian and Israeli People,” which proposed a network of connectivity for Palestinian territories.
While Egypt’s proposal has gained approval from the Arab League, U.S. and Israeli officials have been skeptical. National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes criticized it as impractical, stating that Gaza remains uninhabitable. Conversely, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres endorsed the Arab-led initiative, expressing readiness for UN cooperation.
In conclusion, the differing visions for Gaza’s future presented by Egypt and Donald Trump indicate contrasting approaches to addressing the region’s humanitarian and political crises. Egypt’s extensive proposal emphasizes local resettlement and infrastructure development, gaining support from Arab nations and the UN. Conversely, Trump’s plan, which centers on evacuation and a significant overhaul, faces critical pushback and skepticism from both regional and international stakeholders. The ongoing discourse highlights the complexity of achieving a sustained resolution in Gaza and the necessity for collaborative international efforts.
Original Source: www.jpost.com
