Key Takeaways
- • Carnegie Endowment analyst Zaha Hassan argues that the Trump-led Board of Peace's plans for Gaza are designed to create conditions for the forced displacement and resettlement of Palestinians abroad, a goal the article says aligns with the preferred outcome of both the Israeli government and the second Trump administration.
- • Three leaked development plans, the GREAT Trust, Project Sunrise, and a Rafah temporary-compound pilot run by the U.S.-led Civil-Military Coordination Center (CMCC), reportedly inform the board's activities and would require relocation of Palestinians and acquisition of their land rights.
- • The GREAT Trust plan, developed by Boston Consulting Group executives, Gaza Humanitarian Foundation planners and Tony Blair Institute staff, would confiscate public land (estimated by the World Bank at 35% of the enclave) and place it in a trust, with an internal savings estimate of $23,000 per person for resettlement over rebuilding.
- • The article contends the board has little transparency and that, per the charter and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, it is effectively Trump's personal enterprise with no congressional oversight until U.S. taxpayer funds are appropriated.
- • Hassan warns that stakeholders have limited time to act, since the board is unlikely to outlive Trump's term ending January 2029.
Summary
Writing in a Carnegie Endowment for International Peace piece published July 30, 2026, Zaha Hassan examines whether the Board of Peace's stated aim for Gaza, outlined by High Representative Nickolay Mladenov in May as restoring Palestinian life and creating a pathway to self-determination, is actually guiding the body's work. Hassan argues the board's charter does not mention Gaza at all, and that plans advised by its members point toward forced displacement and resettlement of Palestinians abroad. The board, led by U.S. President Donald Trump, has not publicly called out Israeli measures deepening deprivation in Gaza, according to the article.
According to the article, the board's Gaza activities are informed by three interlinked documents. The GREAT Trust plan, leaked in September 2025 to the Washington Post, recommends a U.S.-led temporary authority, confiscation of public land and potentially private property, and placement of those assets in a trust. Most Palestinians would exchange property rights for permanent housing elsewhere in Gaza, which the plan estimates at two to eight years away, or for a resettlement package to emigrate. An internal scheme codenamed "Aurora" reportedly calculated that resettlement would save $23,000 per person compared with rebuilding and maintaining housing in Gaza. Boston Consulting Group disavowed the work of the executives involved, who have since left the firm. Project Sunrise and the CMCC's Rafah compound pilot, which would relocate tens of thousands of Palestinians to temporary compounds under Israeli military control, complete the framework.
Hassan notes that Apollo Global Management CEO Marc Rowan, speaking at the board's inaugural convening in Washington, described gathering Gaza's productive assets into a unified structure, including rebuilt housing, the coastline and marine gas fields, with Rafah, where 400,000 housing units would be built, as the launch site. The GREAT Trust slide deck proposes registering property title on a blockchain and tokenizing trust assets for investors, a step the article calls controversial given the destruction of land records and the 68 million metric tons of rubble across the enclave.
On governance, the article cites Rubio's recent statement that the board is a nongovernmental organization effectively under Trump's personal control, with near-absolute authority over its agenda, funding and budget. Hassan concludes that stakeholders should demand restructuring and oversight before engaging with the board, and that rights-respecting multilateral mechanisms should be supported in its place. The piece is an opinion and analysis article; the claims about intent are the author's assessment and are attributed to the article's reporting and cited documents.
According to the article, the board's Gaza activities are informed by three interlinked documents. The GREAT Trust plan, leaked in September 2025 to the Washington Post, recommends a U.S.-led temporary authority, confiscation of public land and potentially private property, and placement of those assets in a trust. Most Palestinians would exchange property rights for permanent housing elsewhere in Gaza, which the plan estimates at two to eight years away, or for a resettlement package to emigrate. An internal scheme codenamed "Aurora" reportedly calculated that resettlement would save $23,000 per person compared with rebuilding and maintaining housing in Gaza. Boston Consulting Group disavowed the work of the executives involved, who have since left the firm. Project Sunrise and the CMCC's Rafah compound pilot, which would relocate tens of thousands of Palestinians to temporary compounds under Israeli military control, complete the framework.
Hassan notes that Apollo Global Management CEO Marc Rowan, speaking at the board's inaugural convening in Washington, described gathering Gaza's productive assets into a unified structure, including rebuilt housing, the coastline and marine gas fields, with Rafah, where 400,000 housing units would be built, as the launch site. The GREAT Trust slide deck proposes registering property title on a blockchain and tokenizing trust assets for investors, a step the article calls controversial given the destruction of land records and the 68 million metric tons of rubble across the enclave.
On governance, the article cites Rubio's recent statement that the board is a nongovernmental organization effectively under Trump's personal control, with near-absolute authority over its agenda, funding and budget. Hassan concludes that stakeholders should demand restructuring and oversight before engaging with the board, and that rights-respecting multilateral mechanisms should be supported in its place. The piece is an opinion and analysis article; the claims about intent are the author's assessment and are attributed to the article's reporting and cited documents.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.