Kushner and Witkoff Propose $112 Billion Gaza Resort Plan

Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff have drafted a $112.1 billion plan to transform the Gaza Strip into a luxury destination, a project they call Project Sunrise, according to a draft reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. The plan envisions a decade-long redevelopment that would attempt to repurpose the war-torn territory into high-end hospitality, transportation corridors, and AI-optimized utilities, with roughly half of the funding coming from U.S. grants and debt guarantees. If approved, officials say construction could start in as little as two months, contingent on a sequence of deeply challenging steps, including demining the rubble and restoring basic public services.

The proposal lays out an ambitious sequence of improvements beginning with four phases. In the initial stage, the focus would be on humanitarian relief: temporary shelter, field hospitals, and mobile clinics to treat the injured, while authorities begin rebuilding basic infrastructure such as paved roads and power lines. The plan also calls for immediate steps to resettle people into interim housing and establish agricultural activity so food production can resume. It acknowledges that roughly 2 million Palestinians could be displaced by the development, and that 68 million tons of rubble would need to be cleared along with detoxifying the grounds and removing unexploded ordnance. The draft envisions a mid- to long-term shift toward more futuristic infrastructure, including beachside hotel properties, a high-speed rail network, and electricity grids optimized by artificial intelligence.

The plan specifies a four-phase progression toward a fully revitalized economy and governance framework. In addition to rebuilding, a transitional governance structure would be established, with a Palestinian-international expert board overseeing a new Board of Peace chaired by Donald Trump. Hamas and other militant groups would be barred from holding government roles, and all weapons, tunnels, and military infrastructure would be dismantled under independent supervision. The draft notes that Gaza would be run by a transitional committee of Palestinians and international experts, with the aim of creating a stable environment for private investment and service delivery. However, it remains unclear who would fund the remaining half of the project beyond U.S. support, and the plan does not detail how two million displaced residents would be accommodated in the long term or where they would go beyond temporary shelters.

Officials who have reviewed the proposal have voiced significant skepticism about its feasibility. Critics note that while the United States has signaled willingness to engage with regional partners on Gaza’s reconstruction, the disarmament conditions demanded by Israel and the security vacuum that could follow a rapid withdrawal of militant capabilities would complicate implementation. A White House spokesperson said the administration will continue to work with international partners to sustain a lasting peace and lay the groundwork for a peaceful and prosperous Gaza, but offered no assurances that the Sunrise plan will move forward as proposed. The plan’s financing structure remains unsettled, with the draft stating that roughly half of the $112.1 billion would be underwritten by U.S. grants and debt guarantees and the remainder to come from other sources still unspecified. The document also does not specify how investors would be repaid or how profits from the redevelopment would be distributed, raising questions about risk and return for private participants.

The proposal arrives amid broader debate about Gaza’s future after years of conflict. In public remarks last fall, former President Donald Trump asserted that a comprehensive ceasefire and rebuilding effort would usher in enduring peace for the region and even suggested that Gaza, and the wider Middle East, could be transformed through investments from neighboring states. He pledged Hamas disarmament as part of a broader peace framework, a condition that remains contentious on the ground given Hamas’s entrenched presence in Gaza and the uncertainties surrounding any de‑militarization timeline. Israeli officials have signaled they would demand strong security guarantees before any major reconstruction could proceed, and the plan’s governance model seeks to address such concerns by separating political power from militant actors under international oversight.

While the concept of a “Riviera of the Middle East” for Gaza has been floated in theory by supporters of aggressive reconstruction strategies, experts caution that the scale of the project, the depth of the humanitarian crisis, and the political divisions in both Gaza and Israel pose extraordinary challenges. Critics argue that any plan must prioritize immediate humanitarian relief, safe and voluntary relocation options for displaced residents, salvageable civilian infrastructure, and transparent governance that includes broad Palestinian participation. The Sunrise draft does not provide a clear mechanism for the actual relocation or long-term settlement of displaced populations, and it outlines a political framework that some observers say would be difficult to implement without broad regional consensus, sustained security guarantees, and robust oversight.

World analysis indicates that even with substantial private and foreign investment, the path to a luxury redevelopment of Gaza would be fraught with risk. The project would require unambiguous security arrangements, credible disarmament measures, and assurances that any private sector gains would be shared with local communities rather than captured by political elites or external actors. In Gaza’s current state, the immediate priorities for residents remain basic housing, medical care, clean water, electricity, and reliable food supplies. The Sunrise plan, as presented, offers a long-term, high-profile vision for economic revival but hinges on conditions that are not yet met and on security assurances that are not guaranteed. The result is a future that, for now, sits at the intersection of ambition and uncertainty, reflecting a deeper question about how to reconcile aspirational redevelopment with the immediate needs and rights of Gaza’s civilian population.