IN early February 2025, US President Donald Trump introduced a controversial initiative proposing the relocation of Gaza’s Palestinian population and the redevelopment of the territory under US control.
The proposal received major outrage in the Muslim world and globally, with many seeing it as a violation of international law and a blow to Palestinian rights.
In a conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, President Trump unveiled a contentious plan in which the US would take control of the Gaza Strip by relocating 2.5 million Palestinian residents to neighbouring nations. He characterised Gaza as “a symbol of death and destruction” and suggested that, under US leadership, it could be revolutionised into the “Riviera of the Middle East”, luring global inhabitants. Trump emphasised that this relocation would provide Palestinians with a better life in “safer and more beautiful communities with modern homes.”
The plan, however, is unclear on vital matters such as the legal basis for the US acquisition of Gaza under international law as the acquisition of territory by force is considered illegal under the fundamental principle of the UN Charter esp. Article 2(4) of the Charter, technicalities of relocating millions of people which again violates the basic Human Rights of the Palestinian people under Article 12 of ICCPR and is also considered a crime against humanity under Article 7 of the Rome Statute and the approval of host countries believed to accommodate the dislocated population. Furthermore, the proposal appears to undermine widespread global efforts to promote a two-state solution mentioned in General Assembly resolution 181 (II) in which Israelis and Palestinians coexist peacefully within mutually recognised borders.
The Arab and Muslim-majority countries have promptly and unanimously opposed Trump’s proposal, with key regional players expressing their concerns via official statements and diplomatic channels. In closed-door talks, Egyptian officials have expressed concern that the plan could undermine Egypt’s historic peace treaty with Israel known as ‘Camp David Accords (1979)’. They have informed both the United States and Israel that such a move would jeopardize regional stability and interfere with Egypt’s national security.
Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman of Saudi Arabia has proposed an alternative plan focused on establishing a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital. This plan aims to mitigate the detrimental effects of forced displacement, which violates the UN Charter and basic human rights, while reflecting Saudi Arabia’s pursuit of restored relations with Israel, contingent on a just resolution to the Palestinian issue. Jordan’s King Abdullah II, despite the Wadi Araba Treaty (1994) with Israel, has firmly opposed efforts to annex Palestinian territories or forcibly relocate Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank, as these actions violate Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. He has emphasized that such steps violate international law and escalate regional tensions.
Kuwait and Oman have reiterated their strong support for Palestine’s right to establish an independent state, condemning policies that involve the relocation of Palestinians and Israeli settlement expansion. Pakistan has explicitly rejected the proposal, calling it “deeply troubling and unjust” and asserting that Palestinian land belongs to its people, with the only solution being a two-state arrangement, as per UN Security Council Resolution 1397 (2002). Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan also strongly opposed the plan, calling it a “major threat to world peace” and stressing that no entity has the authority to remove Gazans from their ancestral land.
The widespread condemnation of Trump’s Gaza plan highlights the prospect of crucial strategic implications. The forced evacuation of millions of Palestinians could cause humanitarian crises in neighbouring countries, put strain on resources, and exacerbate conflict in an already volatile region which will lead to regional instability.Countries such as Egypt and Jordan, which already have peace treaties with Israel, might rethink those agreements if the plan is implemented, resulting in a reorientation of alliances and elevated conflicts in the region or globally. Furthermore, the proposal raises serious concerns about violations of international law, specifically potential violations of Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which forbids forced population transfers.
To address these challenges, the Muslim world and the global community may consider various strategies, including economic measures like sanctions or revisiting trade agreements to pressure organizations supporting the relocation initiative. Raising global awareness through media and civil society to garner public support is also a viable tactic. Historical precedents, such as the Anti-Apartheid Movement in South Africa (1960) and the Iraq War Protests in 2003, demonstrate the effectiveness of shifting global narratives through public engagement. Additionally, providing humanitarian aid and development assistance to Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank can help them resist displacement while preserving their ancestral lands.
Egypt, leading efforts for a Gaza reconstruction plan, has proposed a three-phase strategy to rebuild Gaza without displacing its residents, requiring an estimated $53 billion, which GCC countries are expected to fund. A united Muslim front is crucial, with an emergency Arab League summit scheduled for March 4, 2025, in Cairo. This summit will focus on Gaza’s reconstruction and countering proposals for Palestinian displacement, while also discussing mechanisms to ensure effective governance in Gaza. These efforts prioritize Palestinian welfare and aim to maintain regional stability, counteracting destabilizing external plans.
In Conclusion, the plan not only calls into question previously established international legal frameworks but also has the potential to further destabilize the region and increase the risk of a major war with the West and the Muslim World. However, these strategies, taken together, can highlight a holistic strategy for addressing the plan’s challenges, emphasizing humanitarian aid, diplomatic efforts, international advocacy, and economic measures to support Palestinian rights and regional stability.
—The writer is a International Law expert with a rich experience in negotiation, mediation and Alternate Dispute Resolution.
