Jared Kushner Lays Out Trump-Backed ‘Master Plan’ for Post-War Gaza

Jared Kushner, former senior adviser to President Donald Trump, has once again stepped into the center of Middle East discourse by outlining what he describes as a Trump-backed “master plan” for post-war Gaza. The proposal, which has circulated through recent interviews, policy discussions, and media commentary, presents an ambitious — and deeply polarizing — vision for what Gaza could look like after the current phase of conflict ends. Supporters frame it as pragmatic and forward-looking, while critics see it as detached from political realities on the ground.

At its core, Kushner’s plan reflects the same philosophy that shaped the Trump administration’s earlier Middle East initiatives: economics first, regional partnerships, and a reduced role for traditional diplomatic frameworks. Rather than focusing immediately on sovereignty or statehood, the plan prioritizes security stabilization, economic redevelopment, and new governance structures designed to prevent Gaza from again becoming a launchpad for militant activity.

A Reset for Gaza’s Governance

One of the most striking elements of Kushner’s proposal is the call for a complete overhaul of Gaza’s governing system. The plan reportedly rejects any future role for Hamas and casts doubt on the Palestinian Authority’s ability to effectively administer the territory. Instead, it envisions a transitional governing authority, potentially backed by a coalition of Arab states and international partners, that would oversee security, infrastructure rebuilding, and institutional reform.

According to Kushner’s framing, Gaza’s long-term stability depends on removing what he sees as entrenched political incentives for conflict. By installing a new administrative framework — one focused on technocratic management rather than ideological resistance — the plan aims to create conditions where violence is no longer rewarded, and economic progress becomes the primary driver of public life.

Economic Development as the Cornerstone

True to Kushner’s long-standing approach, economic transformation sits at the heart of the master plan. He has argued that Gaza’s coastal location, young population, and proximity to Israel and Egypt offer untapped potential for trade, tourism, and foreign investment. The proposal imagines large-scale reconstruction projects, including modern housing, ports, energy infrastructure, and transportation corridors.

In this vision, international investors — particularly from the Gulf — would play a major role. Financial backing from wealthy regional partners would be paired with private-sector expertise, aiming to turn Gaza into what Kushner has described as a “functional, livable, and economically viable territory.” Proponents argue that prosperity could reduce radicalization by offering residents tangible alternatives to conflict.

Security Before Sovereignty

Another defining feature of the Trump-backed plan is its sequencing: security and economic reform come before political resolution. Kushner has consistently maintained that peace negotiations fail when they are not grounded in stable conditions. In his view, rebuilding Gaza without first neutralizing militant threats would simply reset the cycle of destruction.

As such, the plan reportedly supports a long-term security arrangement involving Israel and regional partners, with strict controls on weapons and border crossings. Critics argue this risks entrenching external control over Gaza, while supporters counter that security guarantees are a non-negotiable prerequisite for any sustainable recovery.

Regional Realignment and Arab Partnerships

The proposal also fits into a broader strategy of Middle East realignment that began with the Abraham Accords. Kushner’s plan assumes that normalization between Israel and Arab states can be leveraged to support Gaza’s reconstruction. By tying Gaza’s future to regional cooperation rather than bilateral Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, the plan seeks to shift the diplomatic center of gravity.

This approach, however, is controversial. Many analysts argue that sidelining Palestinian political aspirations in favor of regional deals risks deepening resentment. Others suggest that Arab states may be reluctant to assume responsibility for Gaza without clear political concessions for Palestinians.

Global Reactions and Criticism

Unsurprisingly, reactions to Kushner’s master plan have been sharply divided. Supporters praise its emphasis on realism, investment, and post-conflict planning — areas they say have long been neglected. Critics, including Palestinian leaders and international human rights advocates, argue that the plan treats Gaza as a real estate project rather than a society with political rights and historical grievances.

There is also skepticism about feasibility. Rebuilding Gaza would require unprecedented levels of coordination, trust, and funding, all while navigating deeply entrenched hostilities. Without broad local buy-in, opponents argue, even the most well-funded plan risks failure.

A Vision That Redefines the Debate

Whether Jared Kushner’s Trump-backed master plan for post-war Gaza ever moves beyond concept remains uncertain. What is clear is that it reflects a distinct worldview — one that prioritizes economic incentives, regional alliances, and security guarantees over traditional peace-process diplomacy.

As the conflict continues to evolve, the plan adds another layer to the global conversation about Gaza’s future. For some, it offers a bold reimagining of what reconstruction could look like. For others, it underscores the enduring gap between external policy visions and the lived realities of the people most affected. Either way, Kushner’s proposal ensures that the debate over Gaza’s post-war path is far from settled.