The Washington Post published the plan circulating between Israeli businessmen, the Trump administration, Netanyahu and other partners. This is a plan for mass expulsion and annexation, with one key difference. Rather than annexing Gaza outright, Israel would hand it over (at least temporarily) to a partnership of colonial investors. This is a more detailed version of a plan whose various drafts have been circulating since at least March 2024.

We can leave its shiny public relations—future projections, animated visuals, green lawns, and AI cities—to the likes of Trump, Blair, Trump’ investor-son-in-law, and the Israeli businessmen behind the plan. What matters is this: An American-Israeli alliance will take control of the Gaza Strip; the Arab partner is the United Arab Emirates, which has also featured in previous reports on transfer initiatives.

Activists protested outside a Tel Aviv hotel where the leadership of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) met. Thousands of Palestinians in Gaza have been killed at aid distribution sites run by GHF, an Israeli–U.S.-backed company, which the UN has described as “death traps,” August 13, 2025 (Photo: Activestills)

The plan is simple: Israel will complete its takeover of all of Gaza. Ideally, when you evict a neighborhood for the benefit of real estate developers, the property would be handed over “free of people and belongings.” However, despite the massive killing, this will only be partially possible. Israel will expel and destroy as much as it can, and then transfer the Strip to a trust via an agreement with the U.S.

So, this is the political future envisioned: Gaza and its Palestinian residents are treated like mere objects, reminiscent of the days when empires divided the world and traded people and countries like commodities. Israel will not officially take possession of the asset—too complicated. Instead, it will be handed to a company combining political and economic control. There are historical precedents for this, such as the East India Company, which effectively ruled India. Later examples exist as well: For example, in 1886, a British company was granted control of the area along the Niger River, which ruled over a large part of what is now Nigeria. The Free State of Congo was the personal domain of King Leopold II of Belgium. The atrocities it committed are worth reading about.

Comparisons to post-WWII arrangements made by advocates of the plan, such as those in Germany, Japan, and the Pacific Islands, are misguided. We are in the era of classical imperialism once again. Colonies can be seized and traded. As the plan’s proponents openly declare, Palestinians lack sovereignty, so Israel is entitled to transfer parts of the occupied territories to whomever it chooses.

True, since World War I, permanently transferring territories and peoples has been considered rude. Instead, Gaza will be handed over to a company that will “hold it in trust” for ten years. What does “ten years” mean? It’s simple: just recall the timeline of the Oslo Accords and when Israel committed to withdrawing from the occupied territories.

The public-private company is a trust committed not to defending the people entrusted to its rule, but rather to the ultimate principle of maximizing profits. Poverty and misery can be sources of immense profits. Note that the developers have stated that 30% of Gaza’s land is public land and will be granted to them from the outset. A nice gift.

Amid the systematic destruction of northern Gaza, the expulsion of Palestinian residents, and their concentration into confined areas — the “concentration zones” or “camps” — people’s future is already being delineated here. Warfare contractors will oversee security, and Israel will gradually transfer control to these private companies. This model combines supply and combat, as exemplified by the “Gaza Humanitarian Foundation” (GHF). The GHF may seem absurd, but it is the model for the entire plan.

But the most important thing, as always, is mass expulsion: Those who can no longer bear life in the remains of Gaza—and everything is being done to ensure this outcome—and who agree to leave “voluntarily” will receive a digital token in exchange for their property rights.

That’s it. With this token, people should be able to “start a new life”. Where? For now, the options include Libya, South Sudan, Ethiopia, and Somalia—countries during deep crises and political disintegration.

Those among the people of Gaza who survive and don’t leave, will perhaps get an apartment in one of the cities that investors will build on the ruins of their country. In other words, Palestinians will receive nothing in exchange for their land; they will essentially be extending credit to investors who will seize their property. What will digital token be worth in the real world? Only God knows. In addition, each person who leaves will receive a small parting gift—$5,000 in cash.

The plan also stipulated that Palestinians would receive “food for a year.” The article doesn’t clarify what this means, but it’s reasonable to assume that it refers to Palestinians in the “concentration zones”. They should know that they will only receive food for one year. Investors like hearing things like that. It’s part of the pressure mechanism to make them leave.

Summary? Mass expulsion, annexation, and takeovers, but not alone. My friend Michael Sfard wrote an important article about living in crime families. We can quote Bertolt Brecht from The Threepenny Opera here, slightly altered: What is a crime family compared to a bank? And what is a war criminal compared to a sleek international crime corporation?

Gadi Algazi

Professor Gadi Algazipublished this op-ed in Zo Haderekh, September 3, 2025.