Post-War Gaza Redevelopment and the GREAT Trust: Assessing the Financial Viability and Geopolitical Risks of a U.S.-Backed Privatized Reconstruction Model

The Gaza Reconstitution, Economic Acceleration and Transformation Trust (GREAT Trust) represents a radical departure from traditional post-conflict reconstruction models. Backed by the U.S. and championed by the Trump administration, the plan envisions a decade-long trusteeship over Gaza, transforming it into a hub for tourism, technology, and industry. At its core, the initiative relies on a privatized framework: landowners receive digital tokens in exchange for redevelopment rights, while residents are incentivized to relocate with $5,000 in cash, four years of rent subsidies, and one year of food aid [1]. The financial model, developed by former Boston Consulting Group experts, projects nearly fourfold returns on a $100 billion investment over 10 years, with private investors funding infrastructure projects like AI-powered smart cities, electric vehicle factories, and luxury resorts [2].

However, the plan’s financial viability is shadowed by profound geopolitical and legal risks. Critics argue that the GREAT Trust’s reliance on forced displacement and blockchain-based population control mechanisms could violate international law, particularly the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits the deportation of protected persons in occupied territories [3]. Legal scholars warn that denying Palestinians the right to return to their homes or failing to provide adequate aid could constitute crimes against humanity [4]. Additionally, the plan’s emphasis on U.S. and Israeli economic control over Gaza’s public land—leased for up to 99 years—risks exacerbating regional tensions, particularly as Arab states propose alternative $53 billion reconstruction plans that prioritize Palestinian sovereignty [3].

The financial incentives for relocation, while attractive on paper, mask deeper ethical concerns. The GREAT Trust calculates that each departure saves the trust $23,000 compared to housing those who remain, effectively monetizing displacement [2]. This approach has drawn comparisons to “disaster capitalism,” where crises are exploited to reshape economies and societies in favor of external actors [4]. Meanwhile, the use of private military contractors to manage aid distribution—despite reports of civilian casualties near aid sites—raises questions about accountability and transparency [3].

Geopolitical instability further complicates the plan’s prospects. The Middle East remains a volatile region, with Israel’s military actions against Iran and U.S. trade protectionism under the second Trump administration heightening tensions [5]. The GREAT Trust’s success hinges on regional stability, yet its reliance on Egypt and Jordan to absorb displaced Palestinians could strain diplomatic relations, particularly if aid deprivation is used as a coercive tool [3].

For investors, the GREAT Trust presents a paradox: a high-risk, high-reward proposition in a politically charged environment. While the financial projections are enticing, the legal and ethical liabilities could deter long-term capital. The plan’s alignment with international law remains unproven, and its potential to destabilize the region could trigger regulatory backlash or reputational damage for involved entities.

In conclusion, the GREAT Trust embodies the tension between innovation and exploitation in post-conflict reconstruction. Its financial model, though ambitious, must contend with the realities of international law, regional stability, and ethical governance. For stakeholders, the challenge lies in balancing economic returns with the imperative to uphold human rights and geopolitical equilibrium.

Source:
[1] Gaza's Future: Digital Tokens or Displacement? [https://www.ainvest.com/news/gaza-future-digital-tokens-displacement-2509/]
[2] Trump mulling postwar Gaza plan relocating 2 million [https://www.ynetnews.com/article/bjk007h11cgx]
[3] Trump's Gaza Plan is Absurd and an Affront to International Law [https://www.justsecurity.org/108050/trump-gaza-plan-absurd-international-law/]
[4] Disaster Capitalism and the Postwar Plans for Gaza [https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2025/07/destruction-disempowerment-and-dispossession-disaster-capitalism-and-the-postwar-plans-for-gaza?lang=en]
[5] Geopolitical Risk Dashboard | BlackRock Investment Institute [https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/insights/blackrock-institute/interactive-charts/geopolitical-risk-dashboard]