Main Points :
- A 38‑page proposal, the Gaza Reconstitution, Economic Acceleration and Transformation Trust (GREAT Trust), envisions a U.S.-administered 10‑year trusteeship over Gaza following war.
- Land rights would be tokenized on blockchain; owners receive digital tokens redeemable for cash, housing in AI-powered smart cities, or relocation assistance.
- Each relocating resident would get $5,000 cash, four years of rent subsidies, and one year of food assistance.
- The plan includes 10 mega‑projects—e.g., smart cities, an “Elon Musk Manufacturing Zone,” artificial islands (“Gaza Trump Riviera”), ports, highways, data centers.
- It projects $100 billion investment with potential fourfold returns, aiming for a self-sustaining fund and eventual Palestinian self-governance.
- The model has sparked criticism: concerns over ethnic cleansing, loss of sovereignty, war crimes, and disaster capitalism.
- Key figures involved include Trump allies, Israeli businessmen, input from BCG (which later disavowed involvement), Tony Blair’s think tank (distanced itself).
- Critics note serious legal, ethical, and geopolitical risks in tokenizing a conflict zone.
1. Background & Overall Vision
The GREAT Trust proposal—a 38-page document leaked in August 2025—outlines a radical post-war strategy for Gaza. It proposes that the United States administer Gaza for at least 10 years, directing reconstruction via a “trusteeship” model.
At the core is the tokenization of land: landowners would surrender rights in exchange for digital tokens recorded on blockchain. These tokens could be converted into cash or housing in six to eight AI-powered smart cities built from scratch.
2. Citizen Incentives & Relocation Scheme
Under the plan, all of Gaza’s over two million residents would face “voluntary” relocation—either abroad or into secure zones within Gaza—as part of rebuilding. Each person agreeing to relocate would receive:
- $5,000 in cash
- 4 years of rent subsidies
- 1 year of food assistance
All distributed via token-based systems, enabling transparency and blockchain traceability.
3. Mega-Projects & Infrastructure Goals
The proposal details 10 mega‑projects, including:
- “Elon Musk Smart Manufacturing Zone”
- “Gaza Trump Riviera & Islands”—luxury resorts inspired by Dubai’s Palm Islands
- Ports, highways, railways, a data center “Safe Haven,” sustainable energy infrastructure, and smart, AI‑driven cities where ID-based systems manage services and economy.
4. Financial Model & ROI
The plan argues for $70–100 billion in initial public investment, unlocking $35–65 billion in private capital. Over 10 years, projections suggest:
- Creation of $300 billion+ in assets
- $385 billion in total returns
- Annual revenues exceeding $4.5 billion
- One million jobs (250,000 direct, 750,000 indirect)
- Drastic GDP growth, improvements in housing, healthcare, education—representing an 11x increase in Gaza’s GDP.
The model envisages reinvesting surplus above a threshold into a Palestinian Wealth Fund.
5. Accountability, Governance & Sponsorship
The proposal emerged from U.S.- and Israel-affiliated Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), with financial modeling by Boston Consulting Group—though BCG later denied authorized involvement and fired the partners involved. Tony Blair’s institute participated in discussions but distanced itself from core elements like population relocation.
The governance scheme envisions US-led trusteeship, eventually evolving into a multilateral custodianship, with handover to “reformed Palestinian self-governance” once Gaza is demilitarized.
6. Criticisms & Legal/Ethical Concerns
The plan has drawn intense backlash:
- Human rights groups, including CAIR, warn the tokenization of land and displacement could amount to war crimes.
- The Guardian calls it a “thinly veiled” forced displacement and ethnic cleansing.
- Observers label it “disaster capitalism”, commodifying suffering and undermining Palestinian sovereignty.
- Common Dreams describes it as transitioning from colonialism to “corporate colonialism”.
Legal experts highlight risks of violating international law, while tokenization in Gaza lacks regulatory frameworks to prevent exploitation or fraud.
7. Geopolitical & Crypto-Sector Context
This proposal intersects with broader trends in real-world asset tokenization, as seen in places like the UAE. But unlike stable, regulated markets, Gaza lacks legal certainty—raising investor risk amid U.S.–China crypto rivalry and regional instability.
8. Conclusion
The GREAT Trust plan is a bold vision—blending blockchain, smart cities, and mega investment to rebuild Gaza. For crypto-savvy readers seeking innovative opportunities, this signals how real estate tokenization could fund reconstruction. Yet the model blends complex geopolitical power plays, ethical pitfalls, and legal hazards.
