EXPERT INTERVIEW - President Donald Trump shocked the system last week, when he said during a press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, that the United States could potentially “take over” the Gaza Strip, telling reporters that he envisions the relocation of Palestinians and that the U.S. could take a “long-term ownership position” with the area being rebuilt as a “Riviera of the Middle East.” As The Cipher Brief tapped a number of experts on the question of whether any aspect of the president’s plan were feasible, we also spoke with former National Intelligence Manager for Iran at ODNI, Norm Roule about the very real complications associated with change in the region. Our conversation has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
The Cipher Brief: Why is Gaza such a challenge?
Roule: The easiest answer is to say that the failure to create a Palestinian state or to remove the Israeli blockade have constrained the development of Gaza. But that's too simplistic. The Israelis withdrew from Gaza in August of 2005. And that could have been a turning point for the region. It didn't happen. Instead, the economic infrastructure that did exist when they left was destroyed. And Hamas used the opportunity to rise and take power from the Palestinian Authority.
In essence, what we have now are two factors. First, there is an absence of alternatives to the poverty, the economic and commercial desert of Gaza, and to Hamas itself, in the area. And that prevents it from growing on its own. More broadly, we've been walking the same roads over and over for 70 years, somehow expecting that we're going to reach different destinations. And absent a change in that path, it's not reasonable to think that we're going to change the future of Gaza and the suffering of the Palestinians who live there.
The Cipher Brief: There are a number of key leaders in the region. Why haven't they had more success in coming up with solutions that address these issues?
Roule: That's complicated. If you mean who could provide an economic impact for Gaza, that's going to be people with capital to spare. So, we're talking about the Gulf Arabs. And the history between the Palestinians and the Gulf Arabs is complicated. The Palestinian PLO stood with Saddam Hussein during the invasion of Kuwait. The corruption of Palestinian institutions has riled Gulf leaders and as generous as they are, I don't think they're in the mood to throw away money on doomed projects, corrupt environments, or to sustain an Iranian proxy that would rise in the ashes of Gaza.
If you mean politically, Egypt and Jordan play large roles in shaping the Palestinian narrative. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the Emirates are equally important. In essence, I go back to my previous point, we have all, and when I say we, I put the region, the Middle East, and the United States in the same situation. We have walked the same path for 70 years, somehow thinking that every day will bring us to a different destination. And instead, people have withdrawn from supporting this when they've come across difficulties. The Gulf Arabs pretty much cut off most aid to the Palestinian political entities because of the corruption. And indeed, in the last couple of years, the United States was the primary donor for United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). And that's simply because the others were tired of throwing money down a hole. But at this point, everybody does believe we have an opportunity for change that could transform the region, transform the history of the future of the region in a way that we've never had before. But it requires a new path.
The Cipher Brief: Whether the path that President Trump laid out recently is the right path or not, my question for you is, what do you think the U.S. could reasonably do to have a positive impact when it comes to this issue between the Palestinians and the Israelis and Gaza itself?
Roule: Well, this needs to be an Arab solution to an Arab problem. The definition of the Palestinian government and how they manage themselves, that's a Palestinian matter in which we should have only modest say in terms of anti-corruption efforts, anti-terrorism efforts, et cetera. But beyond that, we need to shuffle the diplomatic deck. We need a different path to move forward. We can press Israel on a two-state solution, but we need to be realistic that the Israelis and the Palestinians have significant internal political difficulties and now - because of the terrorist attack that Hamas launched against Israel in October 2023, they have traumatized people – making the situation near impossible. And anyone who blames the other is ignoring that fact. We must ask ourselves, if all we do is push for a second state and just start a process to do that, are we just saying that we're going to produce a failed state in the region? Do we wish to put a Yemen or Somalia on the border of Israel or Jordan? I don't think so. We've got to create a different dynamic within the West Bank, within Gaza and the Palestinian territories, or you just end up with the same conversation. And if there's one thing we have plenty of in Washington, it's people who are willing to be part of those endless conversations. And that doesn't do anything to help the suffering of the Palestinian people or the fact that they have legitimate political rights that need to be acknowledged. And Israel has legitimate security interests that need to be respected.
Are you Subscribed to The Cipher Brief’s Digital Channel on YouTube? There is no better place to get clear perspectives from deeply-experienced national security experts.
The Cipher Brief: You mentioned that there has to be an Arab solution to this problem. But you also said earlier that there's somewhat of an unwillingness of the wealthier Arab countries to pour money into Gaza simply because the Palestinian leadership has allowed for the Iranians to fuel and fund terrorist organizations like Hamas and because there's still corruption. There's not a lot of confidence in Palestinian leadership. It's been blamed for failures in the past of significant efforts that were made toward a two-state solution. So, what do you think the conditions are on the ground that need to change when it comes to the Palestinian leadership being able to give the broader Arab community in the region more confidence so that it will begin to provide material support, economic support, other kinds of support that the Palestinians are going to need?
Roule: Former President Bill Clinton will routinely state that the Palestinians had the opportunity for pretty much everything they wanted during his administration and Yasser Arafat found it impossible to take that deal without other compromises that were not part of the deal.
It's not that the Gulf areas leaders are unwilling to put money into this. It's almost a very practical look at the real estate. There's no question that if you look at a map that the Palestinian territories, the Palestinian future state and Israel are where you need to transit if you're going to Europe from the region. So, it's just not prudent to put multi-billion-dollar communications, transportation, or energy lines through a territory which is governed by Hamas, which is politically turbulent, and which is subject to periodic Israeli massive destruction. That's inconceivable.
We need pressure from a lot of sides to say that we need new Palestinian leadership. Now they can choose it, but clearly Abu Mazen, the head of the Palestine Liberation Authority, is not going to lead us to solutions. And the Israelis have to make profound concessions on how they handle the pro-Palestinian state that will develop. The Saudis have been very clear, and indeed within minutes of the president's statement, which I believe was about 4 a.m. Riyadh time, they came out with a very crisp, clear statement, in essence repeating where they've always been. Two-state solution, legitimate Palestinian rights. We don't support deporting Palestinians from their own territory.
What's your alternative to fix Gaza? That's best handled in private. But at the same time, we haven't yet reached the position where all parties involved are willing to sit down and uniformly pressure each side to make these hard decisions. And in fairness, they do have internal political dynamics that make that far more difficult than just showing up to Prime Minister Netanyahu's office or Abu Mazen's office and saying, ‘do this today’. They have genuine political dynamics on the inside that make that complicated, but nothing won't change unless we have uniform international pressure.
Everyone needs a good nightcap. Ours happens to come in the form of a M-F newsletter that keeps you up to speed on national security. Be in the know. Sign up today.
The Cipher Brief: You mentioned that everybody needs to come together. President Trump has something of a reputation for dropping bombshell statements. And then, usually, what he actually does - for those who can pause long enough - turns out to be something very different. Do you think that what he said will have an impact on regional leaders and that they will now think about coming together on steps that could lead to a better solution?
Roule: It's already had an impact. Within a day of the president's statement, you had regional leaders having discussions. You've had Israeli leaders having discussions. So, he's provoked a conversation. And I think there's some positives from the president's statement that need to be highlighted. This is an American president that, just a few weeks into his second administration, is saying, ‘I want to have a serious commitment to the Palestinian problem’. I don't think that's ever happened before.
The second thing is that this is a long-term commitment. And he's saying that he will provide U.S. leadership with a regional approach. So, he's exposing his administration to the risks of this not working. Now, whatever your views on the president's proposal, holy cow, that's an opportunity because you've got someone engaged who's not walking away, who didn't say the Middle East is not going to be our priority. We're only going to look at China, which many people said was the approach of the last administration. And that is a basis on which you can build a regional approach.
And for those who don't like the president's proposal, you have to ask, what's the alternative? That's how diplomacy works. And that part will likely be handled in private. Steve Witkoff has the DNA to do exactly that. He and Morgan Ortagus are focused and they have the president’s blessing to push hard. So, I'm confident something will be built on this.
The Cipher Brief: During the first Trump administration, they were successful in bringing about the Abraham Accords, when a lot of people didn't think that they could do it. And it really started to warm relations among countries that were willing and eager to work together in ways that they hadn't done for a long time before the Hamas attack derailed progress on that. Do you feel like there is still an underlying sense of ‘We want to make progress in the region and are willing to work together to do it?’
Roule: The answer is that the world has changed since October 7th. But as we saw in the Saudi statement, and I think that's important to look at that, they're talking about a two-state solution and recognizing Israel. The economic integration that would bring has not been discounted. All of those opportunities still exist. But it is clear that we will need a path to a two-state solution that is deemed as ‘irreversible’ by the region at this point in time.
I listen to the president's statements closely. I've listened to all the objections. There are valid reasons why this is very challenging. It would be difficult for the Jordanians and the Egyptians to absorb Palestinians who are currently living in Gaza. But the Palestinian people need themselves to say that they're in support of a very different future. And I think what may be missing from this dynamic is that you have plenty of Palestinian voices saying this is a bad idea. Some of those are forged by Hamas, but the Palestinian voices who aren't speaking, what do they want to do? Leaving a million and half people in rubble in conditions that six months ago, we said were inhumane means we need some urgent, decisive thinking and it will have to reshuffle the deck. We'll need some new approaches to this. None of them will be easy. Nothing is easy in the Middle East.
Read more expert-driven national security insights, perspective and analysis in The Cipher Brief because National Security is Everyone’s Business.
