The 'Deal of the Century': A Peace Plan or a Mediterranean Real Estate Pitch?

When Donald Trump unveiled his much-hyped 'Deal of the Century' for peace between Israelis and Palestinians, it promised an unprecedented economic boon, especially for the Palestinians. However, a closer look at the 181-page document reveals a proposal less about genuine political reconciliation and more about a grand real estate development scheme, painting a picture of a future Palestinian entity transformed into a 'Mediterranean Riviera' or a 'New Singapore.'

The plan's economic section, spearheaded by Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, envisioned over $50 billion in investments, primarily from Gulf states, aimed at boosting the Palestinian economy.

Yet, the foundational political conditions for this prosperity seemed to bypass fundamental Palestinian aspirations, such as an independent, sovereign state with East Jerusalem as its capital, and the right of return for refugees. Instead, it offered a fragmented state, stripped of strategic control, with Israel retaining significant security oversight and nearly all of Jerusalem.

The proposed economic prosperity was contingent upon Palestinians ceding core demands, effectively trading national self-determination for material improvements.

It spoke of creating a bustling port, an airport, and a high-speed rail line connecting Gaza and the West Bank – infrastructure projects more akin to a modern city-state development than a resolution to a deeply entrenched political conflict. Critics quickly pointed out the audacious suggestion that Gaza, a besieged territory, could transform into an economic powerhouse without addressing the underlying occupation and humanitarian crisis.

The language of the plan often echoed that of a business prospectus rather than a diplomatic framework.

It presented a vision where Palestinians, long denied control over their resources and borders, would suddenly thrive under the benevolent guidance of external investors, without true political empowerment. This approach raised fundamental questions about the nature of peace: Is it achievable by simply buying off grievances, or does it require genuine recognition of rights and a fair distribution of power?

Ultimately, the 'Deal of the Century' was widely rejected by Palestinians and much of the international community for its perceived bias towards Israeli interests and its failure to address the core issues of occupation, borders, and sovereignty.

It was seen not as a bridge to peace, but as an attempt to normalize an untenable status quo, repackaging political subjugation as an economic opportunity. The dream of a 'Mediterranean Riviera' for Palestinians remained, for many, a bitter reminder of a peace plan that felt more like a real estate transaction than a pathway to justice.