Many are applauding President Donald Trump’s “bold” proposal that Egypt and Jordan play a central role in resolving the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict by absorbing refugees from war-torn Gaza, with some calling it the “only real way to achieve peace.”
On Saturday, President Donald Trump, who has previously brokered historic agreements in the region, suggested that Gaza could be cleared out after the devastation of the war started by Hamas on October 7, 2023, with Palestinians resettled in neighboring Arab nations for humanitarian reasons.
In a gaggle with reporters on Air Force One, Trump said:
I’d like Egypt to take people and I’d like Jordan to take people. You’re talking about probably a million and a half people and we just clean out that whole thing and say, “You know it’s — over the centuries, it’s had many, many conflicts. And … something has to happen.” It’s literally a demolition site … So I’d rather get involved with some of the Arab nations and build housing in a different location, where they can maybe live in peace. … Could be temporary, could be long-term.
Egypt and Jordan’s participation in the initiative could bolster their regional influence and attract significant international support, with large-scale resettlement projects leading to the creation of jobs, upgrading of infrastructure, and stimulating economic growth. The plan also offers a path toward lasting stability for Palestinians and the region.
The notion of Egypt and Jordan stepping in is not new.
Prior to 1967, Egypt administered Gaza, while Jordan governed the West Bank. Historically, both nations have played pivotal roles in the Palestinian issue, yet direct involvement waned after the Oslo Accords in the 1990s shifted the focus to an independent Palestinian state.
Trump’s statement reignites this regional approach, advocating for Gaza’s residents to be given opportunities in safer, more stable environments.
A Win for the Entire Region
For the nearly 2.2 million residents of Gaza, the plan could represent an escape from poverty, violence, and blockades. By resettling in areas with greater economic opportunities and stability, Palestinians could build better lives for themselves and future generations. International support — backed by Western and Gulf allies — could ensure improved living standards and opportunity in resettlement zones.
In addition, Israel has long faced security challenges from Gaza, where Hamas remains in power. A regional solution could help reduce tensions by eliminating the source of rocket fire and violent conflicts. By partnering with neighboring Arab states, Israel could also strengthen its ties in the region, building on the success of the Abraham Accords.
For the Trump administration, a plan of this magnitude could cement a legacy of diplomacy in the Middle East. As a historic ally of Israel and a key player in the Arab world, the U.S. is uniquely positioned to bring together the parties needed to make this happen.
Proponents believe the time for bold action is now, with many arguing that it could benefit all parties involved. While decades of negotiations have failed to produce a lasting solution, a regional approach could break the deadlock by focusing on humanitarian needs rather than political gridlock.
“Great idea,” remarked conservative commentator Mark Levin on the Trump plan.
“It’s been common sense for 15 months that Arab neighbors should accept refugees from Gaza. Common sense now articulated by President Trump,” wrote Richard Goldberg, senior adviser at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.
“Excellent plan,” wrote conservative Middle East analyst and commentator Caroline Glick.
“Good! And long overdue!” lauded international human rights lawyer Arsen Ostrovsky.
“Best idea yet,” wrote conservative personality Pamela Geller.
“That might work,” wrote journalist David Atherton.
Political consultant Noah Pollak insisted that “this Trump idea is deeply wise, very simple, and would be incredibly successful.”
Arguing that it “offers the only real way to achieve peace,” Pollak described the plan as “by far the most humanitarian way to proceed and should be supported by everyone who wants peace.”
“At last!” remarked Republicans Overseas Chairman Marc Zell.
“With just a few sentences, Trump made the relocation of Palestinians part of mainstream discourse,” wrote author Uri Kurlianchik. “From now on, it will always be another solution that people will consider.”
“This is huge!” he added.
“Most Gazans or their parents came from Egypt anyway, some from Jordan … so returning to their own ancestral homelands makes sense,” declared National security analyst and former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) officer Clare Lopez.
Breitbart News senior editor-at-large Joel Pollak, who called Trump’s proposal “a completely sensible idea,” proposed a similar solution nearly a year ago, though without presuming Israel’s neighbors would comply.
“President Trump’s proposal to resettle Gazans in Egypt and Jordan is not just a bold vision—it’s the only viable solution to free Palestinians from the grip of extremism and offer them a path to prosperity,” suggested the Israel Files, which provides insights on U.S. foreign policy and Israel-related topics.
“President Trump is right because Gazans are the only people on earth not allowed to flee a war zone,” explained Israeli MK Ohad Tal. “I believe that the vast majority of Gazans will leave if they are allowed, which will solve the core problem for the entire region.”
“We are going to work on this proposal with Trump’s new administration in Washington,” he added.
Tal also insisted that we “ask ourselves if we want to solve the Palestinian problem once and for all or continue to fool ourselves by repeating the same mistakes and allow Hamas to control Gaza which will only lead to more cycles of violence.”
Palestinian Emigration
Over 100,000 Palestinians are estimated to have crossed into Egypt since the war began, while many remain in refugee camps within Gaza.
Humanitarian organizations have expressed deep concern over the current conditions in Gaza. While Israel seeks to provide humanitarian aid to Gazans, it struggles to do so effectively due to the ongoing war with Hamas.
Following the October 7 Hamas massacre, Israel invaded Gaza to dismantle Hamas and rescue its hostages. In response, Hamas’s leader at the time, Ismail Haniyeh, railed against any plans of migration of Gazans to Egypt, preferring that Palestinian civilians remain in the warzone after his group launched the unprecedented attack on the Jewish state.
Yet Gazans have long sought to emigrate, even prior to the current conflict, with many actualizing their dream due to the oppressive living conditions under Hamas, lack of economic opportunities, and ongoing violence, seeking better lives abroad. In fact, since Hamas took control of Gaza in 2007, over a quarter million Gazans have fled the coastal enclave, with many paying bribes to escape.
For years, the Gaza Strip has faced a brain drain as young professionals, including doctors, emigrated due to lack of jobs and political instability, with nearly half of those who leave not returning.
Despite Hamas opposing emigration and attempting to prevent bad publicity, its governance and dire economic conditions in Gaza have driven many young Palestinians to seek better opportunities abroad, with Turkey being a primary destination before the recent conflict intensified.
The terror group has prioritized attacks against Israel over improving living conditions for Palestinians, leading to wars, casualties, and emigration under corrupt leadership, while the international community has largely ignored their plight and chose to blame Israel.
As a result, much of the international community has long been accused of displaying a double standard in handling Gaza refugees, even as many displaced Gazans contemplate emigration to secure better futures.
While many countries have been willing to accept refugees from conflicts in Syria, Afghanistan, and Ukraine, there has been a noticeable reluctance to accommodate Gazans, with nations worldwide continuing to oppose the emigration of Gazans, even as war rages.
Meanwhile, the United Nations and foreign media have virtually disregarded the suffering of Palestinians seeking to flee Gaza’s Islamist regime, despite claiming to care for their wellbeing. While human rights activists often push for humanitarian solutions to crises, they appear to resist the voluntary relocation of Gazans to safer areas, a move that merely perpetuates Gaza’s cycle of poverty and conflict.
This inconsistency highlights a selective approach to humanitarian crises, influenced more by political considerations than by pure humanitarian concerns.
Additionally, current international opposition to voluntary Palestinian emigration contrasts with historical support for Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. Though the world backed the forced removal of Israeli Jews from Gaza in 2005 for “peace,” it now appears to reject the migration of Palestinians, despite it potentially improving their lives and reducing hostilities, as desperate Palestinians face rejection from Egypt and Jordan for refuge amid Israel’s bombardment.
Despite Gaza’s dire situation, international leaders largely reject Palestinian emigration, with Egypt and Jordan refusing refugees, and only few Gazans with foreign passports, the wounded, and those paying high fees having crossed into Egypt.
However, some have spoken out on the issue, arguing that emigration could provide Gazans with a chance for a better life, alleviate the humanitarian crisis, and reduce hostilities.
Bill Frelick, director of Human Rights Watch’s Refugee and Migrant Rights Division, insisted that Palestinians have the “right to leave a country, the right to seek asylum, and the right of non-refoulement, that is, not to be pushed back or returned to face persecution or other serious threats.”
Their right to flee, he argued, is an option that “cannot be closed.”
“It is absolutely pivotal that people are allowed to emigrate from Gaza just like from any other place on the planet,” argued Uri Kurlianchik. “It’s insane that no one is even talking about it.”
“Free emigration will do more to promote stability in the region than any treaty or military operation,” he added.
Writing for The Atlantic last year, professor and researcher Joshua Krug called to allow Palestinians who seek to leave Gaza to do so, explaining that “no one should be trapped in a war zone.”
Noting that many Palestinians in Gaza want to escape the violence but face closed borders and international resistance, filmmaker Avi Abelow described the blocking of voluntary emigration from Gaza “unjust and inhumane,” as he urged for the U.S. to “openly call on Muslim countries to take in Gaza refugees.”
One U.S. congressional initiative, reportedly supported by senior officials from both parties, proposed conditioning aid to Egypt, Iraq, Yemen, and Turkey on their acceptance of Gaza refugees, suggesting specific refugee quotas and criticizing UNRWA’s role in perpetuating the refugee crisis.
Proponents argue that the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, marked by massive displacement and severe shortages, underscores the urgent need for international intervention to uphold Palestinians’ rights and provide refuge. Accordingly, they suggest a coordinated international effort, combined with financial support and the establishment of humanitarian corridors, is essential to providing relief to the suffering population of Gaza.
In fact, senior figures over the years, among them Dutch right-wing politician Geert Wilders, have insisted that the country of Jordan should be considered the true national homeland for the Palestinian people, given that Jordan has a majority Palestinian population and integrating Palestinians into Jordan could lead to a more stable regional situation, as Jordan has successfully integrated Palestinian refugees.
Demographically, Jordan has a significant Palestinian population, with a majority of Jordanians ethnically Palestinian. Many Palestinians either fled or were expelled from their homes during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and the Six-Day War in 1967, and they, along with their descendants, have since lived in Jordan. In addition, most are fully naturalized, making Jordan the only Arab country to fully integrate the Palestinian refugees of 1948.
Previously, former U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson suggested the creation of a Palestinian state in Egypt in order to distance Israel from threats posed by it.
In May, conservative Middle East analyst and commentator Caroline Glick accused Egypt of preventing Palestinian civilians from escaping the war zone by “blocking Gazan emigration,” arguing that recent years have shown Egypt, under President el-Sisi, acting as a major state sponsor of Hamas, aiding the terrorist group by building up its forces.
President Trump, widely regarded as having achieved the greatest political comeback in history last November, has pledged to serve as a “peacemaker” during his current term.
Joshua Klein is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jklein@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter @JoshuaKlein.
