A controversial proposal to redevelop postwar Gaza into a high-tech economic hub—complete with projects like a “Trump Riviera” and an “Elon Musk Smart Manufacturing Zone”—has drawn international scrutiny, with the Tony Blair Institute (TBI) acknowledging limited involvement. The plan, titled The Great Trust, was outlined in a slide deck obtained by the Financial Times and spearheaded by Israeli businessmen using financial models developed by Boston Consulting Group (BCG).
The proposal envisions transforming Gaza into a prosperous trade zone, featuring artificial islands off its coast, blockchain-based land development, and branded infrastructure designed to appeal to figures like Donald Trump and Gulf leaders. Among the proposed “mega projects” are luxury resorts, highways named after Saudi and UAE royals, and tech zones intended to host U.S. electric vehicle manufacturers.
Although the Tony Blair Institute did not author or endorse the final deck, two of its staff members participated in planning discussions, and an internal document titled Gaza Economic Blueprint—which included ideas like artificial islands and low-tax zones—was circulated within the group. The Institute stressed it had no role in drafting the core relocation element of the plan, which proposed offering cash incentives for up to 500,000 Palestinians to leave Gaza, an idea that aligns with controversial comments made by former President Trump earlier this year.
BCG has since distanced itself from the project, stating it was done without approval and against internal directives. The firm has fired two partners involved, describing the work as unauthorized and conducted in secret. Despite this, the financial modeling and visual materials created by the BCG team formed the foundation of the slide deck, which was shared with members of the Trump administration and other stakeholders.
The Tony Blair Institute said its involvement was limited to listening and exploring proposals from various parties. It emphasized that neither it nor Tony Blair had ever supported the relocation of Gazans. Still, the institute’s indirect involvement has fueled criticism, as the plan continues to generate backlash over its ethical, political, and humanitarian implications.
