The “New Gaza” plan promoted by President Trump’s administration presents the enclave as a reconstruction and investment project, but it sidesteps a fundamental question: Who owns the land? In Gaza, roughly half of all land is privately owned by Palestinian families holding historically registered legal deeds. Yet the plan makes no reference to ownership, nor does it address mechanisms for compensation or the restoration of property rights.
A U.S. State Department official told Alhurra that Washington does not believe the ownership issue can be resolved at this stage. “You cannot settle property disputes while people are homeless,” the official said. From the administration’s perspective, the immediate priority is to stabilize security and establish a new executive framework through the Peace Council. Legal files, the official said, would come later—once there is an authority capable of making and enforcing decisions. The U.S. official did not deny the existence of a legal problem but downplayed its urgency at this phase. “We are not saying ownership is unimportant,” the official said. “But it cannot be made a precondition for everything. There is a humanitarian and security reality that cannot be ignored.”
In Arab capitals, the reading is different. An official at the Arab League told Alhurra that the issue is not technical but principled. “Gaza is not empty land to be parceled out on a blueprint,” the official said. Ignoring ownership, in this view, opens the door to indirect dispossession, the resettlement of people away from their original lands, and the conditioning of return on security arrangements unrelated to the legal right to the land.
The official explained that land ownership in Gaza falls clearly into three categories. About half of the territory consists of privately owned land held by Palestinian families under legal deeds dating back to the Ottoman era, the British Mandate, the Egyptian administration, and the Palestinian Authority—full ownership rights that are protected under international law and may not be expropriated without compensation. In addition, there are public lands, including beaches, public facilities, and roads, whose legal status remains disputed between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. A third category consists of Islamic waqf lands designated for religious and charitable purposes, protected under both Islamic and international law. “Any plan that does not begin from this reality,” the official said, “treats Gaza as a legal vacuum—an assumption that is dangerous.”
It is this divergence in logic that is fueling concern. Washington views postponing the property file as a necessary pragmatism to launch reconstruction. Arab officials, by contrast, warn that those who begin building before recognizing ownership rarely return to address it. The result so far is a reconstruction model that may rebuild infrastructure while leaving the question of land unresolved—potentially setting more dangerous precedents elsewhere.
The article is a translation of the original Arabic.
Joe Kawly
Joe Kawly is a veteran global affairs journalist with over two decades of frontline reporting across Washington, D.C. and the Middle East. A CNN Journalism Fellow and Georgetown University graduate, his work focuses on U.S. foreign policy, Arab world politics, and diplomacy. With deep regional insight and narrative clarity, Joe focuses on making complex global dynamics clear, human, and relevant.
