Gaza: From Red To Blue
A “four-zone” plan for Gaza’s reconstruction could win Arab, Israeli, and U.S. support.
President Trump transformed the general thinking about Gaza and the day after with his call for Palestinians to be relocated. The president was seemingly thinking in commonsense terms: it is only possible to rebuild Gaza, a completely devastated area in which two million people are living, if you can remove the population. Straightforward, yes, but it is a call that runs counter to the prevailing narrative among Palestinians and Arabs who fear that temporary relocation will lead to inducing Palestinians to leave their homeland permanently. This is precisely what Israeli Ministers Ben-Gvir and Smotrich are calling for, which lends credence to these fears.
President Trump’s thinking was apolitical. And, yet, he put his finger on a real issue. Rebuilding Gaza is a massive task that is very difficult due to two factors. First, there is a profound need to address the housing, medical, water, and electricity needs of the public, even as the herculean task of rehabilitating and restoring infrastructure is being addressed. Second, so long as Hamas is controlling Gaza, there will be no reconstruction and no calm. Investment in Gaza will simply not be forthcoming so long as Hamas retains power. Donors and investors know Hamas will divert materials, try to reconstitute itself, and, even if it takes years, prepare to launch attacks against Israel again. Who will invest knowing that destruction is again guaranteed?
So, the Trump call reflected the need to do something about what would come next in Gaza. He painted a picture without a plan for getting there. But to be fair, no one has offered the pathway or even a picture. Taking account of public Arab opposition to the president’s call, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said, “If someone has a better plan—and we hope they do—if the Arab countries have a better plan, then that’s great…we’re going to look at it…Obviously…any plan that leaves Hamas there is going to be a problem.”
In other words, he said that those who don’t like what the president is proposing should come up with a practical alternative. Slogans will not do. Prime Minister Netanyahu’s call for “total victory” remains as much of a slogan as Arab calls for a two-state solution without a real pathway offered by either for how to get to a credible day after in Gaza.
Gaza can be rebuilt around the principles of “reconstruction for demilitarization” and Hamas’ removal from power. Should Palestinians who would like to leave be able to do so, provided they are allowed to return to Gaza? Yes, and with 100,000 already in Egypt, that is already happening. However, we believe the approach for most Gazans should not be about forced relocation outside of Gaza but movement to zones in Gaza where real needs would be addressed.
Egypt and a number of Arab states are now constructing a plan for Gaza. It is one that almost certainly will call for a technocratic government in Gaza, not Hamas and not Fatah. No doubt, it will outline plans for reconstruction with some funding coming from the Gulf States. However, it will remain hazy about Hamas, implying that Hamas will be out of government but not necessarily out of influence.
It should come as no surprise that no Arab state wants to put forces into Gaza to fight Hamas. But for their plan to be credible, they must be prepared to cut off all smuggling and make certain that no materials or aid can end up in Hamas’ hands. Their plan must ensure that Hamas cannot rebuild itself militarily. Should Hamas threaten law and order or seek to coerce the public, the Arab forces or security contractors deployed to Gaza must be prepared to stop them.
Unfortunately, the plan that Egypt and others present to the Trump administration will probably not address any of these points, much less have an answer for how they will ensure Hamas does not remain a power behind the scenes—much as Hezbollah for years was not part of the Lebanese government but still dictated to it.
Given the likelihood that the forthcoming Arab plan, although a step in the right direction, will fall short and that Israel will lack a plan of its own, we propose the following:
Initially, divide Gaza into four functional zones, each serving a specific role in security, demilitarization, rehabilitation, and reconstruction—with Hamas increasingly isolated from power and no longer able to exploit humanitarian aid or population cover. In our approach, the four zones would be color-coded areas with tight control over movement between them. Red areas would be where armed Hamas are still present. Green areas would serve as safe humanitarian havens for the population, and only there would aid and services be provided under Arab guardianship. Grey areas would be for reconstruction, potentially controlled by the U.S. and/or Arab countries. Blue areas will be those ready for repopulating.
At the outset, most of Gaza will be red, and the proposed design seeks to turn it blue gradually. Designated green and grey areas will be cordoned and cleared of terrorists, arms, and tunnels. Civilians will be advised to leave for safety and be given time to do so, and, as they leave a red zone, provisions there would be decreased, then cut. Hamas leaders and fighters will have the option to surrender or go into exile before the IDF clears the red areas.
Hamas-free areas will be handed over to their temporary guardians, who will secure aid and services or begin clearing and reconstruction. Unarmed and vetted populations will be invited to the green areas, and some of them will be able to work in the grey areas. Egypt proposed to start building in the southern Strip, while Israel would prefer the north. The reconstruction period allows sufficient time to discuss governance and security issues before repopulation.
This concept or model is obviously not a plan nor without questions. Arab states would not have to take on Hamas directly but would be asked to contribute to security, rehabilitation, and investment in the areas that are free of Hamas. Yes, they might hesitate to do this while Israel is dealing with the red areas. Still, if they care about Gazans, they could be supportive of those who have moved to safe, green areas—and the Trump administration could broker understandings between the Israelis and the Arabs and work out the sequence for how this might be implemented.
For example, why couldn’t the president or Steve Witkoff, his negotiator, press different Arab states to provide pre-fab housing and take care of humanitarian needs and law and order within what we are calling the “green humanitarian” zones even as Israel is clearing other red areas of Hamas control? Similarly, could it be possible to get the Arab states to put the needs of Palestinians in Gaza first and accept a rolling approach to rebuilding even as Hamas is denied the ability to control assistance coming in and coerce the public and hide among it? Could the Arabs also assume the responsibility to produce reform of the Palestinian Authority and enhance the training of PA security forces in Jordan in advance of the PA gradually assuming governing responsibility in Gaza over time?
We are sensitive to the political needs of Israelis and Arabs alike, but worry that the Arabs don’t have a real plan for governance and preventing Hamas from re-emerging. The Israelis have no approach other than going back into Gaza and getting stuck. Neither approach will lead to the rebuilding of Gaza.
One thing we know for sure: if the politics on each side predominate, hostages won’t be released, Gazans will continue to suffer, and the war will be ongoing. A serious day-after approach, practically defined so it can actually be implemented, is needed. President Trump has shaken up the chessboard with his proposal but with no means to act on it. Our four-zone approach offers a pathway that could be implemented, but it will take the administration working with the Arabs and Israelis to produce it.
Ambassador Dennis Ross is counselor and William Davidson Distinguished Fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Ambassador Ross’s distinguished diplomatic career includes service as special assistant to President Barack Obama and National Security Council senior director for the Central Region, special advisor to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, Middle East Envoy to President Bill Clinton, and Director of Policy Planning for President George H.W. Bush.
Assaf Orion is a retired Israeli brigadier general and defense strategist whose broad research scope ranges from relations with China to Israel’s regional political-military strategy and policy. He is the Liz and Mony Rueven International Fellow with the Washington Institute.
Image: Anas-Mohammed / Shutterstock.com.