‘Completing the genocide': What is the US-Israeli endgame with Gaza takeover plan?

US President Donald Trump's controversial statements about taking over Gaza, displacing over 2 million Palestinians, and transforming the region into the “Riviera of the Middle East” have sparked widespread condemnation from across the world.

Observers see the proposal as part of a larger strategy that aligns with Israeli goals of expelling Palestinians from Gaza, advancing ethnic cleansing, and completing what many describe as an ongoing Israeli genocide.

“Trump's proposals would amount to the forced removal of the Palestinian population of Gaza,” Martin Shaw, a British sociologist and academic, told Anadolu.

“If this was done, either by the US or Israel, it would amount to ‘ethnic cleansing' and, in effect, would be a method for completing the genocide that Israel has carried out. It would clearly break international law in several ways.”

Similarly, British-Palestinian academic Emad Moussa denounced the idea as a blatant war crime.

“Even if Trump knows it's a war crime, the fact that Israel has committed every war crime imaginable in Gaza and got away with it means he's downplaying the repercussions of such a step,” he remarked.

“As if to say, war crimes have been normalized, so why not go all the way to the end and ethnically cleanse Gaza?”

While Trump had been pushing for the expulsion of Palestinians to countries such as Jordan and Egypt, his statements at Tuesday's press conference alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took the rhetoric to a new level.

“The US will take over the Gaza Strip, and we will do a job with it too. We'll own it … We'll make that into an international, unbelievable place. I think the potential in the Gaza Strip is unbelievable, and I think the entire world … will be there, and they'll live there,” he told reporters.

- Trump's one-state solution: A Jewish-dominated state?

His words sparked backlash from around the globe, with almost all world powers and even US allies opposing the idea, and the UN warning that “any forced displacement of people would be tantamount to ethnic cleansing.”

Trump's team has since tried to walk back on some of his ideas, claiming that he was proposing temporary, not permanent, resettlement of Palestinians.

That argument has found few takers, and according to Ryan Bohl, a senior MENA analyst at risk intelligence firm RANE, Trump's remarks serve as a signal to Israel that Washington would support efforts to transfer Palestinians out of Gaza.

Bohl believes Trump's proposal implicitly advocates for one, Jewish-dominated state that maintains Israel's grip over the entire region.

“Trump is now suggesting that there will be a one-state solution. It will be a Jewish-dominated state in that region, and many Palestinians will be pushed out as a result and absorbed into other countries,” Bohl explained.

“This will be the permanent solution to this long-standing conflict. It'll be giving over the territory to Israel completely,” he said, adding that Trump is pushing for Israeli hegemony over both Gaza and the West Bank.

Trump also sees Israel as a reliable American partner, as well as one that benefits his political base and aligns with his career objectives.

“I don't think Trump has that strong of an opinion on what the Israelis should do, but instead, what he wants to do is empower the Israelis to impose whatever solution they want – under this government, that's a one-state solution dominated by Jewish Israelis.”

Also, Bohl added, the specifics of how such a plan would be implemented remain vague.

“Several hundred thousand could be moved gradually into the West Bank, Jordan, and Egypt so that the numbers don't appear so large that it looks like the Gaza Strip is completely ethnically cleansed,” he said.

“That's still functionally what it would be, but it would stay out of the headlines. I think this is what the Trump administration is telling Israel, ‘You can try doing this, and if it works, good for you.'”

- How serious is Trump about taking over Gaza?

Experts remain divided on the seriousness of Trump's statements. Some see them as empty political rhetoric, while others fear they reflect a dangerous and deliberate strategy.

Moussa believes Trump's remarks are partly aimed at courting Israel's far-right, particularly to bolster Netanyahu's government, which could face collapse if ceasefire talks continue.

“Smotrich already threatened to withdraw from the government if the agreement with Hamas was going to move to Phase Two,” Moussa noted, referring to far-right Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich.

Moussa also argues that Trump's proposal stems from an arbitrary, poorly informed perspective, made without serious consideration of Gaza's complex realities.

He pointed out that even key figures in Washington, including Senators Chris Murphy and Lindsey Graham, have dismissed some of Trump's ideas as “unrealistic” and “insane.”

Additionally, Moussa suggested that Trump's remarks are part of a broader strategy known as “smoke and mirrors” – where an extreme or shocking proposal is introduced to normalize an otherwise unacceptable idea over time.

“Consider how Israel used unprecedented methods to systematically destroy Gaza's hospitals – an act that even the Nazis did not do during WWII – only for it to be normalized later as ‘it is as it is,'” he explained.

“Similarly, by merely suggesting the idea of moving Gazans out of Gaza and then the US taking over, it'll prepare the public to accept it in the long run.”

On the question of US troop involvement, Bohl believes that Trump has no real intention of sending American forces to Gaza.

“Trump's political instincts tell him that another US Middle Eastern military mission would be disastrous for him. It was disastrous in Iraq for Bush, it was disastrous for Reagan in Lebanon in the '80s, and Trump knows this,” he stated.

“US boots on the ground in Gaza still remains pretty unlikely, but if it does show up, I would expect it to be at a place like Rafah, where the mission would be very limited and be mostly symbolic.”

Moussa also asserted that Trump does not have a plan for a takeover: “Any sane person within the US administration knows well that this is unrealistic, and could be disastrous, not only for the US and Palestinians, but for the region as a whole.”

- Is Trump sincere about rebuilding Gaza?

While Trump claims his vision for Gaza involves economic redevelopment, many experts remain skeptical.

Moussa pointed out that Israel's long-term goal has been to ensure Gaza remains uninhabitable for Palestinians, which contradicts any notion of meaningful reconstruction.

“Essential to this is maintaining Gaza's inability to rehabilitate, and key to that is by obstructing, slowing, or limiting reconstruction efforts. This is why the Trump-Netanyahu press conference didn't come near Phase 3 of the ceasefire, which contains the reconstruction clause,” he explained.

Bohl, meanwhile, sees Trump's comments as an attempt to entice potential investors, rather than a genuine commitment to rebuilding Gaza.

“I think Trump is trying to drum up sentiment, make people interested in the idea of rebuilding Gaza for their own commercial benefit. I think he's probably trying to entice investors the way a salesman would,” Bohl said.

He emphasized that Trump is unlikely to allocate direct US funding for Gaza's reconstruction.

“Trump is obviously very skeptical of foreign aid across the board. He's already cutting back aid programs, shutting down agencies like USAID, so he will not put US dollars behind this, but if he can convince the Saudis, Emiratis, or other international actors to step in, that's what he's trying to do,” Bohl added.

“If he can get individual business people to do the same, he would also consider that a win. I don't see him as very serious as wanting to put the US into a position where it's responsible with federal money to rebuild Gaza.”

Moussa, meanwhile, warned that Trump's claims about investment “could well be a facade for clearing the way to the return of Israeli settlements into Gaza.”

- Is Trump using Gaza to strongarm other countries?

Some analysts believe Trump's statements are part of a larger effort to pressure regional actors into accepting US and Israeli plans for the future of Gaza and Palestinians.

For Shaw, whose work focuses on global politics, war and genocide, this is the most plausible explanation.

This is designed to pressure Jordan and Egypt to take in Gazan refugees, and “to facilitate Israel's plans to prevent Gaza from being properly reconstituted under Palestinian control and to help them implement whatever schemes they have to permanently take over at least part of Gaza,” he said.

Moussa also suggested a link with Trump's push for normalization of ties between Saudi Arabia and Israel.

“Israel wants to normalize with Saudi Arabia without paying the price: a Palestinian state, which may not work,” he said.

“Signs show that regional states, certainly Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, are coming together in mutual interests to thwart any attempt to remove Palestinians from their land.”

This could be “because they fear such developments could engulf the region with fire,” he said.

“They also fear their peoples, who dominantly see the Palestine cause as their moral and nationalistic compass,” Moussa added.

“The question remains, will Trump risk his long-term plan of ‘economic prosperity and profit' to meet the fantasies of Israelis?”

Bohl concluded that there could be an element of aiming to pressure regional players.

However, he stressed that Trump may not be actively seeking to destabilize these countries, and rather make them open up to the idea of resettling Gazans, at least in limited numbers.​​​​​​​