President Donald Trump dropped a bombshell when he suggested that the United States should take control of Gaza, while its current residents would be relocated elsewhere. Under Trump's plan, the Gazans would be resettled, the Strip would be rebuilt, and the US would become the new owner of a Mediterranean coastal enclave. From an Israeli perspective, this is a terrible idea.
For us, America is like a "friendly giant", a large, distant nation that has always come to Israel's aid. "Always" is, of course, a relative term. In Israel's early years, Washington was cool, even hostile, toward us, going so far as to impose an arms embargo. The special relationship between the two countries did not emerge in 1948.
Nevertheless, the US today is undoubtedly seen as a friendly superpower, perhaps Israel's only true ally in the world. But that positive impression could quickly fade if the US were to become our new neighbor. Just ask Mexico, Colombia, Cuba, or Panama: for them, the giant remains a giant, but a far less friendly one. In its own backyard, the US has often been aggressive, heavy-handed, and willing to redraw the borders of neighboring states to serve its own interests. The US-Mexico War, the invasion of Panama, and Panama's separation from Colombia are all examples of American behavior toward its close neighbors.
Is this just a coincidence? A shared border inevitably leads to friction. Issues such as resource management, migration, crime, trade, air pollution, and, of course, military build-up all become points of contention between neighboring states. Special frameworks and initiatives are needed to minimize the unavoidable friction. The European Union is one such attempt; the federal structure of the US itself is another example. Without mechanisms like these, states frequently clash, often resorting to force to resolve disputes on their own terms. Today, we see how the Trump administration uses tariffs as leverage against Canada and Mexico to shape border policies.
When reconstruction fails
Given this, enthusiasm for US control over Gaza, or the dismissive attitude of "what's the worst that could happen?", is misguided. If the US were to become our neighbor, we would suddenly be sharing a border with the world's most powerful nation. Issues that currently do not concern us at all would become major challenges, and the US would leverage its power to pressure Israel into compliance.
Take a simple example: imagine that the US does take control of Gaza. Does that control extend to the territorial and economic waters off the Strip? Trump is well aware that the eastern Mediterranean is home to vast gas fields. What will the Israeli government do when a US president wants to negotiate the maritime boundary between Gaza and Israel?
Or consider another entirely plausible scenario: Gaza's reconstruction stalls due to a lack of funding. The US, stuck with a devastated territory, decides to sell it. Instead of continuing to manage the area, it looks for a Middle Eastern country to take responsibility. Who would compete for the opportunity? Three likely candidates come to mind: Qatar, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia. Israel would certainly protest if the Strip were handed over to Qatari or Turkish control, but it would have no power to prevent such a move.
Gaza could also become a new weak point along Israel's southern border. Imagine that four or eight years from now, a Democratic administration takes office in Washington. The new leadership decides to loosen border controls between Gaza and Egypt, arguing that those seeking entry are primarily Palestinians returning to their homes. Soon, terrorists, criminals, and migrants start pouring into the Strip, looking for ways to bypass the fence and enter Israel. Jerusalem, of course, would protest, but the White House would gently remind us that this is an "internal American matter" and that Israel has no place interfering. In any case, domestic politics (Congress) would prevent the White House from adopting a stricter policy. Then what?
Despite Trump's good intentions to resolve the conflict, the only entity that should control Gaza is Israel. One could debate the possibility of Israel maintaining security control over the Strip while a local body, perhaps with international support, manages civilian affairs. That, is a discussion worth having. But relinquishing control over a strategically vital region, even to our closest ally across the ocean? That would be a mistake.
