‘New Gaza’ or More of the Same?

The Palestinian Right to Return and Reparations, the UNCCP, and Durable Solutions

Glitzy skyscrapers, beachfront resorts, tree-lined parks, and green spaces. A new “Riviera of the Middle East.” Jared Kushner, the Special Envoy for Peace in President Trump’s second administration, presented such a vision for Gaza at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in January 2026. Kushner is calling it “New Gaza.”

[Source: Irish Times]

While the “New Gaza” proposal purports to rebuild Gaza so that it is once again habitable, it ultimately leaves unaddressed and thus fails to resolve longstanding issues as old as the Zionist-led expulsion of Palestinians from Palestine: the destruction and/or dispossession of Palestinians’ property, which hampers the facilitation of their right to return, and Palestinians’ right to compensation for such destruction and dispossession.

Any new plan for a postwar Gaza must include reparations for Palestinians who were dispossessed of their homes, land, and other forms of property or whose homes, lands, and properties were destroyed. The “New Gaza” plan is, in this regard, sorely lacking.

The “New Gaza” plan is the culmination of an ethnic cleansing plan that began with the 1948 Nakba, which was carried out by Zionists prior to the establishment of Israel. The Nakba was part of the plan to remove as many native Palestinians from Palestine as possible so that European Jews could settle there. To be clear: this was a flagrant violation of international law.

Indeed, the first UN General Assembly resolution concerning Palestinians following the Nakba reaffirmed the customary international law already well-established at the time — that expelled Palestinians had the right to return to their homes and lands and were legally entitled to reparations: property restitution and compensation for their losses (if restitution was not possible) and for other wrongful acts committed against them. Paragraph 11 of Resolution 194 (III), passed in 1949, reads: “[Palestine] refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property, which, under principles of international law or equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible.”

Restitution of property and compensation for lost or damaged property that could not be restituted were seen as essential for a just and rights-based durable solution (though they remain secondary to the right to return home). This is illustrated by the fact that Resolution 194 (III) also created the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine (UNCCP) — one of two UN agencies dedicated to a specific refugee population, the other being the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA). UNCCP was tasked not only with mediating between parties to resolve the Palestine issue but also with finding ways to effect refugee repatriation, restitution, and compensation.

Now, contrast the requirements of international law with the “New Gaza” plan. Unfortunately, the “New Gaza” plan (and other proposals that have been floated by the White House) acts as if Resolution 194 (III) does not exist, as if the UNCCP does not exist, and as if the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination does not exist. For instance, Kushner’s “New Gaza” PowerPoint presentation mentions the creation of over 100,000 permanent housing units in “New Rafah” and the provision of “improved temporary housing until permanent housing is ready.” The “GREAT Trust” Plan (“GREAT” stands for “Gaza Reconstitution, Economic Acceleration and Transformation”), which is circulating among White House officials, mentions “temporary housing,” “temporary housing zones” during reconstruction efforts, and “permanent residential housing” consisting of “medium-sized” units of 323 square feet per person. Further, the UAE has contracted with a Gaza-based firm, Masoud & Ali Contracting Co. (MACC), to build an Emirati-funded village for displaced Palestinians near Rafah, dubbed “The Emirates City.” However, none of these plans mentions restitution or compensation for Palestinians whose properties — homes, apartments, lands, farms, and so forth — have been destroyed or damaged by the Israeli military, which is why they need temporary housing in the first place.

[Source: UN News]

To clarify, both temporary and permanent housing is needed in Gaza following the near-complete destruction of infrastructure in the Gaza Strip by Israel and the displacement of around 90% of the population. In a humanitarian crisis as dire as the one Israel has created in Gaza, any assistance, from all actors, is welcome and much needed. However, reparations — property restitution and compensation for destroyed, damaged, or lost property of Palestinians dating back from the Nakba to the present — must also be part of any postwar Gaza redevelopment plan if there is to be a successful realization of Palestinians’ legal rights.

Although the UNCCP has been largely defunct since 1964 and there is little political will to revitalize it so that it can fulfill its mandate, its work in the 1950s-60s was far from fruitless. The UN Secretariat in New York houses, thanks to the UNCCP’s efforts, the most official collection of records of Palestinian land registers dating back to as early as the Ottoman Empire and British Mandate Palestine before the establishment of Israel. Of course, the records may not be perfect, and the displacement of Palestinians has been ongoing since the Nakba in 1948. But it’s a solid starting point that has been the basis for more complete land records and cadastral surveys. (For example, see Dr. Salman Abu Sitta’s *Atlas of Palestine*, which builds on the UNCCP’s records and is even more comprehensive.) And the fact that the UNCCP records have the official imprimatur of the United Nations bolsters their legitimacy.

President Trump and UN Member States need not look or go far. The answer to — or at least a key component of — realizing the Palestinian people’s right to return to their homes and lands is right under their noses, so to speak. To begin instituting a durable solution for Palestinians, they can start with the UNCCP’s records.

Any sincere redevelopment plan must account for the dignity of a population that has suffered nearly a century of human rights abuses and crimes of genocide. First, there must be, in accordance with international law, the provision of Israeli funds for implementing return, restitution, and compensation for the Palestinian people. Second, there must be an official UN statement acknowledging that the century-long suffering of Palestinians resulted, in part, from the international community’s complicity and acquiescence. Both actions would go a long way in instituting a dignity-based recovery, which is essential for a lasting peace, a durable solution, and a just homecoming for the Palestinian people.

Author Bio:

Josh Kim is a second-year J.D. Candidate at Boston University School of Law. He is currently a clinical student in the International Human Rights Clinic. He is completing an academic paper on Palestinian refugees and related United Nations (UN) agencies.