Follow us on social

google cta
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
google cta
google cta

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
google cta
Reporting | QiOSK
Dan Caine
Top photo credit: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine conduct a press briefing on Operation Epic Fury at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., March 4, 2026. (DoW photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza)

Did Caine just announce the Morgenthau option for Iran?

QiOSK

Gen. Dan Caine’s formulation of American war aims in Iran is remarkable not because it is bellicose, but because it is strategically incoherent.

In a press conference Tuesday morning, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not describe a limited campaign to suppress missile fire, blunt Iran’s naval threat, or even impose a severe but bounded setback on Tehran’s coercive instruments. He described a campaign against Iran’s “military and industrial base” designed to prevent the regime from attacking Americans, U.S. interests, and regional partners “for years to come.” In an earlier briefing he put the objective similarly: to prevent Iran from projecting power outside its borders. Rather than the language of a discrete coercive operation, this describes a war against a state’s capacity to regenerate power.

keep readingShow less
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

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.