Donald Trump’s Gaza Reconstruction via Blockchain Sparks Outcry

Key Insights:

• U.S. plan proposes tokenizing Gaza land under trusteeship.
• 2M Gazans offered digital tokens, subsidies, relocation.
• AI “smart cities” and mega-projects pitched for rebuild.
• Critics call it land theft and illegal under international law.

Crypto markets have shrugged off recent political turmoil even as a Donald Trump’s new Gaza rebuilding proposal rattles observers. Bitcoin and Ethereum remain near multi-week highs, and real-world asset (RWA) tokenization is booming – on-chain RWA value recently hit about $17.1 billion, up 94% year-over-year.

But a leaked post-war Gaza plan has dominated headlines: as reported by The Washington Post on August 30, it would allegedly put Gaza’s land titles on a blockchain. Under one draft, Gazan landowners would be asked to hand over deeds to a U.S.-backed trust in exchange for digital tokens.

Each token could be redeemed for cash or a housing unit in a planned “smart city,” while displaced families would get $5,000 plus multi-year rent and food subsidies.

Proponents pitch the scheme as an “innovative funding model” using a blockchain registry and fractionalized ownership – mirroring broader RWA trends – but the idea has sparked fierce backlash.

Blockchain-Backed Gaza Plan Details

Two leaked plans have circulated. In one, known as the “Great Trust”, Israeli businessmen working with the Boston Consulting Group envisioned Gaza as a “blockchain-powered, low-tax investment zone.”

The 30- page slide deck even mocked up digital tokens to fund development, pitching Gaza’s public land as a “digital trust” sold to global investors.

Gazan land would be tokenized on-chain and split into tradable units, effectively offering fractional ownership of land parcels to wealthy buyers.

Another draft – dubbed the “GREAT Trust” – reportedly supported by backers of the Trump administration and the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, would see the U.S. administer Gaza under trusteeship.

That plan similarly “tokenizes Gaza using a blockchain as [a] record of ownership,” splitting land into tokens for sale. It would grant each participant a crypto token for their property, later redeemable for housing, and relocate an estimated quarter of Gaza’s population in a “voluntary” program.

Rights Groups Decry ‘Land Theft’

The proposal has provoked sharp condemnation. Civil rights and Palestinian advocacy groups have blasted it as exploitative.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a leading U.S. Muslim civil rights organization, warned that the plan amounts to “the takeover of Gaza and the mass theft of Palestinian land through a digital token scheme,” calling it “morally abhorrent and illegal under international law” – “a war crime of historic proportions.”

Palestinian activists and experts have used equally strong language. Tech for Palestine advisor Dr. Ashok Kumar compared the token plan to “vultures circling a dying body,” saying it is “not just grotesque. It is evil.”

Critics note that the proposal would effectively strip Gazans of land rights under the guise of blockchain innovation. They also point out that Gaza’s own residents overwhelmingly say they want to stay in their homes, not trade them for tokens.

In short, many observers decry the scheme as a form of digital colonialism and land grab, rather than a genuine aid or investment plan.

Crypto Market and Regulatory Context

From a crypto perspective, the Gaza tokenization scheme highlights the growing intersection of finance and geopolitics.

Tokenized real-world assets are indeed a surging trend: tokens of debt and property now attract 1 billions of dollars and Wall Street is eyeing an estimated $30 trillion tokenization market.

Yet experts stress the gulf between theory and reality. As one blockchain analyst noted, commercial-scale land tokenization is still years away, especially in a war-torn context.

Implementing such a complex project would face huge technical and legal hurdles: tokens representing Palestinian land would almost certainly qualify as securities under U.S. law, requiring registration or exemption.

SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce has warned that “tokenized securities are still securities”, underscoring that issuing land tokens would draw strict regulatory scrutiny.

Investors and regulators have also become sensitized to crypto’s role in conflict zones. For example, analysts noted a recent 11% drop in Iran’s crypto trading amid the Israel-Iran tensions and sanctions.

In the case of Gaza, any token sale would likely raise immediate questions about compliance, transparency and ethical use of funds.

No major exchange or fund has signaled support for a Gaza token offering, and some suggest that even if technical feasibility existed, institutional demand could be weak given the massive political risk and human rights concerns.

For now, the Gaza tokenization plan remains at the proposal stage, and key parties like BCG and the Tony Blair Institute have distanced themselves . However, the episode has already underscored a broader lesson: blockchain and crypto are not politically neutral tools.