Trump & a Century of Outsiders Planning Palestine’s Future

The recent cease fire in Gaza offers a fragile hope for an end to the conflict, but the scale of destruction makes clear that extensive rebuilding will be necessary. In response, President Donald Trump has proposed plans for redevelopment, drawing on what he calls his “natural instinct as a real estate person.” However, Trump is not the first New York real estate developer to envision external control and development of the region.

A History of External Plans

Over a century ago, Henry Morgenthau Sr., a Manhattan developer and U.S. Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire beginning in 1913, similarly considered the future of the area. His actions helped establish a pattern of outsiders seeking to control the region, a practice that, according to the source, has fostered mistrust and ultimately harmed the interests of the local population. Morgenthau initially focused on aiding American business and missionary interests, touring Palestinian lands in April 1914 and noting the region’s poverty.

As World War I began, Morgenthau’s role shifted to supporting American-affiliated interests, including providing funds to Zionist colonists impacted by the war. He resigned his post in 1916, disillusioned by his inability to prevent the massacre of Armenians, and returned to the United States to support Woodrow Wilson’s re-election campaign. During a speaking tour, he proposed that “Jews and Christians should unite in the purchase of this sacred land,” envisioning a “small free republic or an international park” governed by Christian nations, and the development of a new harbor in Jaffa.

Did You Know? Henry Morgenthau Sr.’s plan for Palestine included the idea that developers would construct a large new harbor in Jaffa, anticipating a surge in tourism.

Morgenthau’s comments, the source indicates, undermined diplomatic efforts. His successor, Abram Elkus, reported in 1916 that the Ottomans believed the United States sought to acquire Palestine, damaging relations. This pattern of external intervention continued with the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement, which initially proposed an “international administration” for Palestine before Britain ultimately assumed control as a Mandate, promoting Jewish immigration despite Palestinian resistance.

Even under British rule, proposals for international control persisted. The Peel Commission of 1936 suggested an “enclave” around holy sites governed by international trustees, and the 1947 United Nations Partition Plan included a “Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem.” Ultimately, none of these plans came to fruition.

Expert Insight: The repeated proposals for external control of Palestine, spanning over a century, demonstrate a consistent pattern of outside actors attempting to impose solutions without fully addressing the needs and desires of the local population. This history of intervention has likely contributed to the deep-seated mistrust that characterizes the region today.

More recently, President Trump offered to “take over the Gaza Strip,” proposing an economic development plan overseen by experts and secured by an “International Stabilization Force.” This echoes the historical trend, prompting concerns that the devastation in Gaza is being viewed as a potential “real estate bonanza.”

Frequently Asked Questions

What was Henry Morgenthau Sr.’s role in relation to Palestine?

Henry Morgenthau Sr. was a New York real estate developer who served as the U.S. Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire beginning in 1913. He proposed that Jews and Christians jointly purchase Palestine and establish it as an international park.

What was the Sykes-Picot Agreement?

The Sykes-Picot Agreement, negotiated in 1916 between Britain and France, initially proposed placing Palestine under “an international administration,” though this element was later abandoned when Britain assumed control of the region.

What is the significance of these historical proposals?

These historical proposals demonstrate a long-standing pattern of external actors attempting to control and develop Palestinian land, often without considering the perspectives of the local population, and have contributed to a legacy of mistrust.

Given this history, what role will external actors play in the future of Gaza, and how can a path forward be forged that prioritizes the needs and self-determination of the Palestinian people?

Leave a Comment