Trump’s Gaza Resettlement Gamble: A Plan Rooted in History

President Donald Trump’s latest Middle East proposal—to relocate the Palestinian population from Gaza to Egypt and Jordan—has ignited intense controversy. While both Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and Jordanian King Abdullah have strongly opposed the plan, Trump remains convinced that economic leverage and diplomatic pressure will eventually bring them on board. The initiative, controversial by today’s standards, has deep historical roots stretching back to the aftermath of Israel’s War of Independence and the enduring Palestinian refugee crisis.

A Historical Precedent

Trump’s plan is not without precedent. Since the creation of the Palestinian refugee issue in 1948, various proposals have aimed to resettle Palestinians in neighboring Arab countries. Historically, these plans have been rejected by the Arab League, which prioritized the refugees’ "right of return" to Israel over permanent resettlement elsewhere. Most Arab nations, with the exception of Jordan, refused to grant citizenship to Palestinians, fearing that integration would weaken their broader political struggle against Israel.

As early as the 1950s, British and American officials recognized that refugee resettlement could serve regional stability. British MP Richard Crossman observed in 1951 that the Arab League viewed the refugee issue as a political tool against Israel. Similarly, UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld’s 1959 proposal suggested that refugee absorption would benefit Arab economies. Yet, such initiatives were repeatedly blocked by Arab leaders, who saw them as legitimizing Israel’s existence.

Failed Resettlement Attempts

Multiple international efforts sought to find homes for Palestinian refugees, but all were met with resistance. In 1949, the US and UK tried to relocate 500,000 refugees to Syria, but the plan was abandoned after a coup in Damascus. Throughout the 1950s, the US proposed economic incentives for Arab nations to integrate refugees, with plans spearheaded by John Foster Dulles, President Eisenhower, and Joseph Johnson. Each attempt faced fierce opposition from Arab governments, fearing political backlash or instability.

Alternative solutions also surfaced. Iraq briefly considered a population exchange, taking in Palestinian refugees in return for allowing its Jewish citizens to emigrate to Israel, but the plan never materialized. Canada expressed willingness to accept displaced Palestinians in 1955, but Arab leaders denounced it as a Zionist scheme. Even in 2008, then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice suggested resettling Palestinians in South America—an idea swiftly rejected.

The Jordanian Factor

Jordan, already home to millions of Palestinians, is particularly resistant to any relocation plan that would alter its demographic balance. With Palestinian refugees making up over 70% of Jordan’s population, King Abdullah fears any further influx could destabilize the Hashemite monarchy. Yet, some opposition figures, like Dr. Mudar Zahran, advocate for Jordan as an alternative Palestinian homeland.

The Political Calculus

Trump’s plan faces the same core obstacle that doomed past resettlement efforts: Arab nations see Palestinian refugees not as a burden, but as a political asset. Keeping them in limbo sustains international pressure on Israel and reinforces Palestinian claims to land within Israel’s borders. Over the decades, efforts to integrate refugees have been met with accusations of betrayal. Even UNRWA, originally intended as a humanitarian agency, has been accused of perpetuating the crisis rather than resolving it.

The Road Ahead

Despite international condemnation and resistance from Arab leaders, Trump is unlikely to abandon his proposal. With economic incentives and political pressure, he may yet push Egypt and Jordan toward reluctant cooperation. But history suggests that no relocation plan can succeed without addressing the deep-seated political resistance that has stymied every similar initiative for the past 75 years. The Palestinian refugee issue remains a linchpin of Middle Eastern geopolitics—one that no administration has been able to untangle.

Written by Col (Res.) Dr. Raphael G. Bouchnik-Chen for Besacenter.org