Trump pushes Palestinian relocation plan in meeting with Jordan’s King Abdullah II

US President Donald Trump met with Jordan‘s King Abdullah II at the White House on Tuesday, 11 February, to discuss the escalating crisis in Gaza. The meeting, intended to address the fragile ceasefire and humanitarian crisis in the region, quickly became the centre of global controversy after Trump outlined his bold and divisive proposal to relocate Palestinians from the Gaza Strip to neighbouring countries, including Jordan and Egypt.

This Trump Gaza plan, framed as a solution to long-standing Middle Eastern tensions, has been met with widespread condemnation. Trump’s suggestion to transform Gaza into a luxury destination while displacing its population has not only alarmed Arab nations but also raised serious humanitarian concerns among global leaders and rights organisations.

What is Trump’s plan for Gaza, and why is it controversial?

During the high-stakes meeting, Trump proposed an unprecedented strategy: the relocation of Palestinians from Gaza to Jordan and Egypt, with the US assuming control over the territory. Referring to his vision as the creation of a “Riviera of the Middle East,” Trump claimed that Gaza could be redeveloped into a luxury hub, suggesting that Palestinians would “live beautifully elsewhere” in neighbouring countries.

“Palestinians will live safely in another location that is not Gaza. We will run Gaza very properly; we’re not going to buy it,” Trump stated during the discussion, adding that he had no personal interest in real estate development in the area. This Palestinian relocation proposal not only dismisses the complex historical and political significance of Gaza but also blatantly disregards the right of return—a key demand in Palestinian negotiations for decades.

Jordan’s King Abdullah II, who has long played a diplomatic role in regional peace efforts, responded cautiously. While he expressed concern for Gaza’s humanitarian crisis, offering to bring 2,000 critically ill children to Jordan for medical treatment, he firmly distanced himself from Trump’s relocation plan. “We have to keep in mind how to make this work in everyone’s best interest,” King Abdullah remarked, stressing Jordan’s obligation to prioritise its national interests.

How have Jordan and other Arab nations responded to Trump’s Gaza plan?

Jordan, which already hosts more than two million Palestinians, has categorically rejected Trump’s proposal. King Abdullah emphasised that while Jordan remains committed to supporting humanitarian efforts, the relocation of Palestinians to Jordanian territory is not a viable solution. “We have to do what is best for our country,” he stated when pressed about the possibility of providing land for displaced Palestinians.

The rejection from Jordan reflects a broader consensus among Arab nations. Egypt, another key player in the region, has been non-committal, with officials stating that they will present their position after further discussions. Arab leaders fear that Trump’s Middle East diplomacy approach could destabilise the region, exacerbate tensions, and undermine the Palestinian cause.

Prior to his meeting with Trump, King Abdullah held talks with US National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and other key officials, indicating Jordan’s strategic attempts to manage the situation diplomatically while resisting pressure from the Trump administration.

What are the implications of Trump’s threats to withhold US aid?

In an attempt to pressure Jordan and Egypt into accepting his Palestinian relocation proposal, Trump hinted at the possibility of cutting US financial aid to both countries. When asked directly about this during the press briefing, Trump responded, “Yeah, maybe. Sure, why not? If they don’t, I would conceivably withhold aid, yes.”

The United States provides substantial financial assistance to Jordan and Egypt, both considered critical allies in maintaining stability in the Middle East. Threatening to withhold aid could have severe economic and political repercussions, further straining diplomatic relations at a time when cooperation is essential to managing regional conflicts.

Experts argue that Trump’s transactional approach to foreign policy, where financial leverage is used to secure political objectives, risks alienating key allies. “Using aid as a bargaining chip undermines long-standing partnerships and destabilises fragile alliances,” said Dr. Leila Hassan, a Middle East policy analyst based in Washington. “It’s a short-sighted strategy that could backfire, leaving the US with diminished influence in the region.”

How does Trump’s Gaza plan affect the fragile ceasefire?

The meeting took place against the backdrop of an already fragile ceasefire in Gaza. Hamas has accused Israel of violating the terms of the truce, announcing the suspension of further hostage releases. In response, Trump urged Israel to resume military operations if all captives are not freed by the weekend, further escalating tensions.

Trump’s aggressive stance threatens to derail peace efforts, with critics warning that his Trump Gaza plan could ignite further violence. The relocation proposal not only dismisses the humanitarian crisis facing Palestinians but also risks triggering widespread unrest across the region.

Meanwhile, the United Nations has highlighted the dire need for Gaza’s reconstruction, estimating that over USD 53 billion will be required to rebuild infrastructure destroyed during recent conflicts. Trump’s focus on luxury redevelopment, rather than addressing the root causes of the crisis, has drawn sharp criticism from international organisations.

What does this mean for US foreign policy in the Middle East?

Trump’s proposal represents a radical shift in US foreign policy, prioritising bold, unilateral actions over multilateral diplomacy. His Middle East diplomacy strategy, characterised by controversial decisions and provocative rhetoric, has strained America’s relationships with traditional allies while emboldening adversaries.

The Palestinian relocation proposal reflects Trump’s broader foreign policy ethos—treating complex geopolitical issues as negotiable business deals. However, the Middle East’s historical, religious, and political intricacies cannot be reduced to transactional exchanges.

As global leaders react to Trump’s latest proposal, it remains clear that the path to lasting peace in Gaza cannot be paved with luxury developments and forced relocations. The international community continues to call for diplomatic solutions grounded in respect for human rights, national sovereignty, and the voices of those most affected by decades of conflict.