US-backed ‘New Gaza’ plan draws Arab fury over 'partition' fears: FT
Arab and European officials have voiced concern over a US-led initiative to "reconstruct" Gaza under Israeli control, warning it will marginalize Palestinian sovereignty.
Arab nations are pushing back against a US-supported proposal to rebuild a “New Gaza” within the Israeli-occupied areas of the enclave, warning that the plan could lead to the long-term "partition" and occupation of parts of Gaza, the Financial Times reported.
The initiative follows a US-brokered ceasefire between "Israel" and the Palestinian Resistance last month, which left Gaza occupied along the so-called Yellow Line: Israeli invading units occupy one side, while Palestinians effectively govern the other.
US pressing UNSC to enshrine Gaza plan
In parallel, the United States is reportedly pressing the United Nations Security Council to adopt a resolution that would formalize President Donald Trump’s "Gaza peace plan" under international law, leaving little room for negotiation, The New York Times reported, citing senior US officials and diplomats involved in or briefed on the talks.
This move has heightened concerns among Arab and European states about the potential marginalization of Palestinian interests.
Devastation, reconstruction challenges
The scale of Israeli destruction in Gaza, much of which has been reduced to rubble during genocide, has made reconstruction a priority for both Western and Arab states. Israeli and US officials have ruled out directing funds to "Hamas-controlled areas", but some, including President Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, have suggested rebuilding the Israeli-occupied side as a way to provide Palestinians an "alternative" to the Resistance group.
The concept echoes previous proposals, since abandoned, for "Hamas-free bubbles floated by Israeli officials during the war." Arab, Muslim, and European nations have expressed concern to the US, fearing the plan could lead to the occupation of parts of Gaza.
Diplomatic pushback
US officials argue that the plan could allegedly jump-start Gaza’s reconstruction and create a "demilitarized New Gaza” that would be safe for "Israel". Kushner, a chief architect of Trump’s 20-point ceasefire plan, alleged that construction in "Israeli-controlled areas" could provide the people of Gaza “a place to go, a place to get jobs, a place to live.” An Israeli official said, as quoted by FT, that the idea is among several options under consideration.
Concerns about permanent division
Arab states are particularly concerned that the temporary boundary along the so-called Yellow Line could become permanent. Jordan’s Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi emphasized that Gaza is “one and part of the Palestinian Territories” and called for a clear timeline for "Israel’s" withdrawal.
Another Arab diplomat warned, “The optics would be disastrous. It would look like we are building for Israel and not the Palestinians. We don’t want Gaza to become this sort of limbo between war and peace and [where] the current situation becomes the status quo.” According to the diplomat, no Arab state would fund reconstruction under such conditions.
Trump’s 20-point plan envisions a phased Israeli withdrawal as an "international stabilization force" deploys, though the size, mandate, and contributors to this force remain unclear.
Security, geographic concerns
Egypt has expressed particular concern over the proposal to rebuild in Rafah, in southern Gaza near the Egyptian border. Concentrating Palestinians in this area could make it easier for "Israel" to attempt displacement into Egypt, should it choose to do so. Hardline members of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government have previously floated plans to "resettle" the residents of Gaza, including a Trump-backed “Gaza Riviera” concept.
Even within Israeli security circles, doubts exist. Former intelligence officer Michael Milshtein said Hamas would likely attempt to disrupt the project, and "splitting" Gaza, one of the world’s most densely populated territories, would inevitably divide families. He argued that the plan mirrors prior strategies, including "Hamas-free bubbles” and a “humanitarian city” in Rafah, that sought to contain the Palestinian Resistance using limited economic incentives.
Skepticism over Palestinian cooperation
Observers note that Palestinians, displaced multiple times during the war, may be reluctant to relocate again under Israeli occupation. Former US Ambassador to "Israel" Dan Shapiro said, “The notion that you could prove to Gazans that the better life is available when not under Hamas rule… is something that we hope is true. But I think it’s very hard to imagine either the investment or the movement of the population into that area, at least in the near term.”
A source familiar with Gulf Arab perspectives echoed these concerns, stating that the current priority is humanitarian aid and that Gulf states might consider funding reconstruction in Israeli-occupied areas for relief purposes, but not for broader settlement or “New Gaza” projects.
Wider context
The United States is increasingly aligning with "Israel" on a strategy to assert occupation of parts of Gaza, allegedly promoting reconstruction projects in Israeli-occupied areas while sidelining Palestinians.
US officials, including Jared Kushner, are pushing for a “New Gaza” under Israeli control, with a transitional authority model that could formalize long-term occupation.
Arab and European nations, however, are voicing strong opposition, warning that such a plan would permanently undermine Palestinian sovereignty. Concerns include forced displacement of Palestinians, the creation of demilitarized zones under Israeli occupation, and the marginalization of Palestinian governance structures. Even within Israeli security circles, doubts exist about the feasibility of managing such densely populated areas, while regional actors like Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, and Turkey are pressing the UN to prevent formal adoption of US-backed measures.
For Palestinians, resistance is likely to take multiple forms. Many refuse to be forcibly displaced or accept governance imposed under occupation, while Palestinian Resistance factions may escalate asymmetric operations. Legal and diplomatic challenges are expected, with Arab states and international bodies framing the plan as a violation of international law and Palestinian rights. Meanwhile, humanitarian advocacy will remain a key tool for galvanizing global attention and pressuring donor states to condition reconstruction funding on respect for Palestinian sovereignty.