Trump’s Call for U.S. Control Over Gaza Sparks Tepid Response in Congress

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s proposal for the United States to take over Gaza has met with skepticism from Congress, even among Republican members. Many lawmakers expressed the need for more clarity on the plan during interviews on Wednesday.

Senator Susan Collins of Maine, chair of the Appropriations Committee, indicated she was not inclined to support the proposal. “It came out of the blue. It may be a negotiating tactic rather than a real plan,” Collins remarked. She expressed doubts about the feasibility of deploying U.S. troops in the region.

Democratic Senator Elissa Slotkin from Michigan questioned the legal basis for such a deployment under existing military authorizations, referencing the Authorization for Use of Military Force enacted after 9/11. “There’s a difference between sending U.S. troops for a mission just to be there and forcibly removing a population,” she clarified. Slotkin called the forced removal of people from Gaza a violation of international law and fundamentally immoral.

Alaska Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski noted that she does not believe U.S. involvement would benefit the people in Gaza. “I think they’ve seen enough turmoil in that region,” Murkowski stated, opting not to speculate on the legalities surrounding troop deployment.

Contrastingly, North Dakota GOP Senator John Hoeven expressed willingness to support the U.S. taking charge in Gaza, including troop deployment if necessary. “We’d have to see the how and the particulars,” he commented, emphasizing the need for a strong, strategic approach.

Trump’s announcement came during a joint press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, where he suggested the U.S. could take responsibility for Gaza’s governance and post-conflict reconstruction. “We’ll own it and be responsible for dismantling all of the dangerous unexploded bombs,” Trump said, hinting at the potential need for troop involvement.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt reiterated that Trump has not committed to deploying troops “yet,” dismissing concerns that this would entangle the U.S. in conflicts abroad. She described the proposal as “an out-of-the-box idea.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson indicated general support for Trump’s initiative but acknowledged the necessity for more detailed discussions. He emphasized the risks associated with leaving Gaza in its current state and pledged to consult with Netanyahu on the proposal.

International reactions have been critical, with leaders advocating for a more sustainable two-state solution. Prime Minister Keir Starmer of the UK underscored the need for the Palestinian population to rebuild and return home.

Some members of Congress raised concerns over the costs and logistics surrounding any potential U.S. intervention. Senator John Kennedy from Louisiana stressed the importance of establishing who would be responsible for funding Gaza’s reconstruction.

As discussions continue, various senators described the proposal as provocative and a means to prompt serious conversations about Gaza’s future. “People can’t live in rubble,” commented Pennsylvania Democratic Senator John Fetterman, highlighting the urgency of addressing the situation.

Overall, disagreements over the level of U.S. involvement in Gaza reveal a complex landscape of opinions, as lawmakers weigh the humanitarian implications alongside legal and strategic considerations.