President Donald Trump, who returned to the White House for a second term, initially pledged an administration focused on domestic issues under the “America First” banner.
However, his recent proposals have shifted dramatically, raising eyebrows in Washington and beyond. His plans include “taking over” and reconstructing Gaza, regaining U.S. control of the Panama Canal, and suggesting that the U.S. buy Greenland from Denmark.
Trump’s Gaza Proposal: A Bold Vision or Overreach?
Trump’s most controversial idea so far is his plan to remove about 1.8 million Palestinians from Gaza, rebuild the war-torn region, and develop it into a luxury destination dubbed the “Riviera of the Middle East.” This plan involves U.S. long-term ownership of the area, which many of his allies and critics have labeled imperialist and impractical.
Key figures like Sen. Rand Paul expressed dismay, calling the move a betrayal of Trump’s earlier “America First” promise. Paul warned against another costly foreign occupation that could waste American lives and money.
Trump’s motivations remain unclear—whether this is a real estate-inspired land grab, a tough foreign policy stance, or an effort to assist Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in managing his far-right coalition. Either way, Washington insiders are left puzzled by this policy shift.
Trump’s Advisers Clarify the Plan
Following the backlash, key members of Trump’s team, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and press secretary Karoline Leavitt, sought to downplay concerns.
They explained that the president’s goal is not to permanently displace Gazans or to deploy U.S. troops. Rubio emphasized that Trump’s plan should be seen as a “generous offer” meant to help rebuild the region after years of devastation.
Leavitt reassured the public that the plan would not burden American taxpayers or involve troops on the ground. She said the U.S. would oversee the reconstruction to promote stability without direct military involvement.
However, the administration has yet to explain how it plans to navigate opposition from key Arab nations like Egypt and Jordan, or under what legal authority it could carry out the relocation of Gaza’s population.
Opposition at Home and Abroad
Trump’s proposal has faced criticism both from Democrats and international allies. Sen. Chris Coons called the idea “dangerous and insane,” arguing that dismantling USAID while tackling a major humanitarian crisis is contradictory.
Middle Eastern and European allies also rejected the plan. The Arab League called it a “recipe for instability,” while British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock condemned the forced displacement of Palestinians, calling it a violation of international law.
Even some of Trump’s allies, like Sen. Lindsey Graham, oppose U.S. involvement on the ground in Gaza. Graham suggested that efforts should instead focus on the destruction of Hamas and facilitating a long-term solution through the involvement of neighboring Arab nations.
Trump Remains Defiant
Despite the widespread rejection, Trump remains confident. He insists that his proposal has widespread support and has received praise from Netanyahu, who believes the idea could lead to a more secure and prosperous future for the region.
Trump’s shift from “America First” to more expansionist policies marks a significant change in his administration’s foreign policy approach. His Gaza proposal,
however, has sparked intense debate, with many questioning its feasibility, legal grounding, and impact on regional stability. As Trump pushes forward, the world watches to see whether this vision is practical or simply political theater.