Follow us on social

Paul Bremer Iraq

Trump considering US-led Iraq-style occupation of Gaza

Officials are reportedly looking at the Coalition Provisional Authority as a model

Reporting | QiOSK

The Trump administration is reportedly considering a plan for the U.S. to lead the administration of Gaza after Israel’s siege, similar to how Washington ran Iraq after the 2003 American-led invasion.

Reuters reports that there have been “high level” discussions “centered around a transitional government headed by a U.S. official that would oversee Gaza until it had been demilitarized and stabilized, and a viable Palestinian administration had emerged.”:

The sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity as they were not authorized to discuss the talks publicly, compared the proposal to the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq that Washington established in 2003, shortly after the U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein.

Most experts cite the CPA as the catalyst for an impending insurgency that mired the U.S. military in war in Iraq for more than a decade, from which hundreds of thousands were killed at a cost of upwards of $3 trillion.

Like the U.S.-led war in Iraq, Reuters adds that “there would be no fixed timeline for how long such a U.S.-led administration [in Gaza] would last” while “[a] U.S.-led provisional authority in Gaza would draw Washington deeper into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and mark its biggest Middle East intervention since the Iraq invasion.”

Quincy Institute research fellow Annelle Sheline called the idea “appalling and absurd,” adding, “Americans should remember the futility of imposing a government on Iraq at the barrel of a gun. The fact that Trump is apparently considering this demonstrates how captured he is by Israel, rather than prioritizing the interests of the United States."

“If this is true, then it is a complete turn to the policies of the Bush administration in terms of occupying Middle Eastern land,” added the Quincy Institute’s Trita Parsi. “It’s the opposite of what Trump promised the American people in terms of bringing troops home and disentangling the U.S. from the region.”

Parsi continued: “It also shows that as long as Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories continues, which is the root cause of the violence, the U.S. will always face pressures to be pulled back into the Middle East.”

Hardline neoconservative think tank Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs, or JINSA, and the Vandenberg Coalition released a plan last year — with similar contours to what Reuters reported — that called for the creation of a private entity, the “International Trust for Gaza Relief and Reconstruction” to be led by “a group of Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates” and “supported by the United States and other nations.”


Top image credit: Iraqi interim Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih (2nd L) and U.S. administrator Paul Bremer are sandwiched between armed guards before Bremer boarded a U.S. Air Force plane at Baghdad International Airport for his flight out of Iraq June 28, 2004. The United States handed over sovereignty to an interim Iraqi government on Monday, formally ending a 14-month occupation two days earlier than expected to try to forestall guerrilla attacks. REUTERS/Pauline Lubens/San Jose Mercury News-Pool CLH/CRB
Reporting | QiOSK
POGO The Bunker
Top image credit: Project on Government Oversight

Are American 'boomers' at risk?

Military Industrial Complex

The Bunker appears originally at the Project on Government Oversight and is republished here with permission.


keep readingShow less
Nuclear explosion
Top image credit: Let’s curb loose talk of using lower-yield nuclear weapons

Reckless posturing: Trump says he wants to resume nuke testing

Global Crises

President Donald Trump’s October 29 announcement that the United States will restart nuclear weapons testing after more than 30 years marks a dangerous turning point in international security.

The decision lacks technical justification and appears solely driven by geopolitical posturing.

keep readingShow less
Sudan al-Fashir El Fasher
Top photo credit: The grandmother of Ikram Abdelhameed looks on next to her family while sitting at a camp for displaced people who fled from al-Fashir to Tawila, North Darfur, Sudan, October 27, 2025. REUTERS/Mohammed Jamal

Sudan's bloody war is immune to Trump's art of the deal

Africa

For over 500 days, the world watched as the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) methodically strangled the last major army garrison in Darfur through siege, starvation, and indiscriminate bombardment. Now, with the RSF’s declaration of control over the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) Sixth Infantry Division headquarters in El Fasher, that strategy has reached its grim conclusion.

The capture of the historic city is a significant military victory for the RSF and its leader, Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, though it is victory that has left at least 1,500 civilians dead, including 100 patients in one hospital. It is one that formalizes the de facto partition of the country, with the RSF consolidating its control over all of Darfur, and governing from its newly established parallel government in Nyala, South Darfur.

The SAF-led state meanwhile, clings to the riverine center and the east from Port Sudan.

The Trump administration’s own envoy has now publicly voiced this fear, with the president’s senior adviser for Africa Massad Boulos warning against a "de facto situation on the ground similar to what we’ve witnessed in Libya.”

The fall of El Fasher came just a day after meetings of the so‑called “Quad,” a diplomatic forum which has brought together the United States, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates in Washington. As those meetings were underway, indirect talks were convened in the U.S. capital between a Sudanese government delegation led by Sudan’s foreign minister, and an RSF delegation headed by Algoney Dagalo, the sanctioned paramilitary’s procurement chief and younger brother of its leader.

The Quad’s joint statement on September 12, which paved the way for these developments by proposing a three-month truce and a political process, was hailed as a breakthrough. In reality, it was a paper-thin consensus among states actively fueling opposite sides of the conflict; it was dismissed from the outset by Sudan’s army chief.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.