1,246 words, 7 minutes read time.
Introduction
Recent proposals associated with President Donald Trump and his affiliates have sparked alarm by suggesting the mass transfer of Gaza’s 2.3 million Palestinian residents out of the territory. In late 2024 and early 2025, Trump openly floated plans to “take over” Gaza, “empty” it of Palestinians, and redevelop it as the “Riviera of the Middle East.” Among these ideas are building a new so-called “humanitarian city” in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula to house displaced Gazans, and offering financial incentives for Palestinians to leave Gaza permanently. These drastic schemes, coming on the heels of a devastating war and the destruction of Gaza, have been met with fierce opposition from Palestinians, regional leaders, and international law experts. Critics argue they amount to forced population transfer — a concept widely considered a war crime and a gross violation of human rights.
This analysis, from a pro-Palestinian perspective, examines the legal, ethical, and political implications of these plans, explains why they are fundamentally flawed, and explores who is promoting them. It also situates them within the broader history of forced displacement and the legal frameworks that prohibit it.
Trump’s “Clean Out” Gaza and “Humanitarian City” Ideas
Trump and key allies have proposed a vision that treats Gaza less as the homeland of millions and more as real estate ripe for redevelopment. He has spoken about Gaza’s destruction in real-estate terms, suggesting that once depopulated, the coastal enclave could be rebuilt into a “Middle East Riviera.” He has floated deploying U.S. troops to “do a job” in Gaza, enforcing an occupation that would clear the way for this transformation.
A major piece of this vision is the idea of a “humanitarian city” in Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula — effectively a massive refugee camp that could become permanent. Israeli officials have described this plan as confining all Gazans in southern Gaza, or just across the border, under tight control, while “encouraging” them to “voluntarily emigrate” to other countries. Financial inducements from Gulf Arab states have been suggested as the means to make this transfer happen.
While the rhetoric uses the language of humanitarianism and voluntarism, the reality is that these proposals rely on coercion and collective punishment. They envision uprooting entire communities devastated by war and blockade — pushing them into exile with cash incentives or military pressure, instead of allowing them to return and rebuild their homes.
Why Population Transfer Violates International Law
International humanitarian law is unambiguous: forced population transfer is illegal. The Fourth Geneva Convention explicitly prohibits individual or mass forcible transfers and deportations from occupied territory, regardless of motive. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court classifies “deportation or forcible transfer of population” as both a war crime and a crime against humanity when done with coercive means.
These principles were enshrined after World War II precisely to prevent ethnic cleansing and mass expulsions. The idea that a military occupier can exploit war to permanently remove civilians from their homes is fundamentally at odds with the postwar international order.
Moreover, collective punishment is illegal under international law. Civilians cannot be made to pay the price for the actions of armed groups. Gaza’s population — more than half of whom are children — cannot be erased because they are seen as a political inconvenience or demographic “problem.”
A Second Nakba: Historical Context
For Palestinians, these proposals evoke the deepest historical trauma: the Nakba of 1948, when around 750,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled during Israel’s creation. Many of Gaza’s current residents are the descendants of those refugees, living in one of the most densely populated places on Earth because they have never been allowed to return to their original homes.
Proposals to empty Gaza echo past plans to solve the “Palestinian problem” by removing the people rather than addressing legitimate demands for freedom and self-determination. Throughout history, ideas for “transferring” Palestinians have been proposed and rejected. They failed because Palestinians have steadfastly refused to abandon their homeland and because neighbouring Arab states have long refused to become the dumping ground for Israel’s demographic ambitions.
The Humanitarian and Practical Absurdity
These transfer schemes do not hold up under practical scrutiny either. Palestinians have repeatedly made clear they will not leave voluntarily. Even amid the devastation of war, tens of thousands have returned to ruined neighborhoods rather than live as exiles in the Sinai desert. The bond to the land, shaped by a century of dispossession, is too deep to break with a financial payoff.
Arab states — including Egypt and Jordan — have unequivocally rejected any plan to accept large numbers of Palestinians. They see it as a direct threat to their own stability and to the core of the Palestinian cause. No Arab leader wants to be remembered as the one who signed away the right of return.
Moreover, forcibly breaching borders like Egypt’s Rafah crossing would risk a regional war. There is no existing infrastructure for housing millions of people in the Sinai desert or elsewhere. The logistics would be a humanitarian catastrophe: where would the water, sanitation, schools, and jobs come from? Who would secure these “temporary” camps? History shows that refugee camps often become permanent limbos, breeding resentment and instability for generations.
Who Is Behind These Plans — and Why
Trump’s motivation seems to mix his transactional real-estate mindset with a desire to appear as a bold dealmaker in the Middle East. Key figures in his circle, like Jared Kushner, have spoken of Gaza’s prime coastal real estate as a lucrative opportunity “once Israel removes the civilians.” This reveals the true character of these plans: redevelopment built on ethnic cleansing.
Israeli far-right figures like Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir have welcomed Trump’s ideas. For years, they have promoted fantasies of removing Palestinians altogether, seeing Gaza’s depopulation as a chance to expand Israeli settlements and permanently kill hopes of a Palestinian state.
Some American neoconservatives and ultra-hawkish commentators have also backed versions of this scheme, arguing that Gaza’s residents should be “relocated” to Jordan, Egypt, Libya, or even Europe. These voices have long been hostile to Palestinian self-determination, framing the entire population as an enemy to be neutralized.
What unites these actors is not genuine concern for the lives of Palestinians, but an obsession with reshaping the map to remove what they see as a demographic obstacle. It is an old colonial mindset in modern clothes — “solution” by removal.
Conclusion: A Flawed and Dangerous Fantasy
This population transfer proposal is legally indefensible, morally outrageous, and practically unworkable. It would violate the Geneva Conventions, constitute a war crime, and invite massive instability across the region. It echoes the darkest chapters of Palestinian history and threatens to repeat them.
Most crucially, it treats Palestinians as if they are disposable — as if their land, homes, and heritage can be traded for a better real-estate deal. But Palestinians are not passive objects to be moved around a chessboard. They have an inalienable right to live on their land, to rebuild their communities, and to determine their future free from siege, occupation, or forced exile.
No just or lasting peace can be built on mass expulsion. The world must hold firm to the principle that forced population transfer is never acceptable — not in Gaza, not anywhere. The real solution lies in lifting the siege, ensuring security for all, recognizing Palestinian rights, and engaging in the hard work of genuine political negotiation. Any shortcut that tries to erase people instead of addressing injustice will only sow the seeds of further conflict.
By Pat Harrington
Sources (for reference)
- https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/trumps-gaza-plan-has-stunned-region-heres-a-look-at-serious-obstacles-it-faces/articleshow/107478334.cms
- https://worldfinancialreview.com/ethnic-cleansing-for-gazas-riviera-secret-israeli-memo-trump-plan-palestinians/
- https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2025/02/04/trump-shocks-supporters-with-us-own-and-rebuild-gaza-plan/
- https://scoopempire.com/egypt-and-jordan-reject-trumps-proposal-to-relocate-palestinians/
- https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israeli-minister-calls-voluntary-emigration-gazans-2023-11-14/
- https://www.timesofisrael.com/katz-calls-for-confining-all-gazans-in-humanitarian-city-built-over-rafahs-ruins/
- https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-uk-slam-israel-ministers-voluntary-emigration-gaza/
- https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/menasource/trump-is-serious-about-shaking-up-the-middle-east-even-if-his-gaza-plan-isnt/
- https://www.vox.com/world-politics/24061818/trump-gaza-strip-clean-out-palestinian-population
- https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/30/israel-ministry-concept-paper-transfer-gaza-civilians-sinai
- https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/us-developing-plan-move-1-million-palestinians-libya-nbc-news-2025-05-16/
- https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/26/gazans-vow-to-stay-amid-calls-for-forced-migration
THIRDWAY THINK-TANK | The Voice of the Radical Centre 
Discussion
No comments yet.