Trump's Board of Peace: From Gaza Initiative to Global Ambition
Originally conceived as a modest oversight group for the Gaza ceasefire, Donald Trump's Board of Peace has transformed into a far more expansive international entity. The initiative, which now invites participation from approximately sixty nations, represents a significant development in global diplomacy that has sparked both interest and concern among world leaders.
Evolution of the Board's Mandate
President Trump first proposed the Board of Peace in September as part of his plan to end the conflict in Gaza. However, the board's scope has since expanded dramatically beyond its initial Middle Eastern focus. According to emerging details, the board's charter grants extensive executive powers to its chairman, including veto authority and the ability to remove members, albeit with certain limitations.
The White House has already selected key figures for the founding executive board, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, special envoy Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner, and former British prime minister Tony Blair. This high-profile lineup underscores the board's growing significance on the international stage.
Gaza Peace Plan Implementation
Despite the board's expanding global ambitions, its original purpose remains central to current operations. Following a United Nations Security Council mandate, the board was established to help secure peace in Gaza after last October's fragile ceasefire took effect. The Security Council also authorised the deployment of a temporary International Stabilisation Force in the region.
The Trump administration recently announced that phase two of the Gaza peace plan is now underway, focusing on what it describes as "the full demilitarisation and reconstruction of Gaza." Under this framework, fifteen Palestinian leaders will assume responsibility for Gaza's day-to-day governance, ultimately reporting to the Board of Peace.
Nevertheless, the ceasefire remains precarious, with both Israel and Hamas accusing each other of violating the peace agreement, highlighting the ongoing challenges in the region.
International Participation and Concerns
Approximately thirty-five nations have already agreed to join the board, according to senior Trump administration officials. Participants include Middle Eastern allies such as Israel, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar, and Egypt. Other confirmed members span diverse regions, including NATO members Turkey and Hungary, as well as Armenia, Azerbaijan, Morocco, Pakistan, Indonesia, Kosovo, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Paraguay, and Vietnam.
However, the invitation extended to Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko has proven particularly controversial, reflecting broader concerns about the board's membership criteria. Several European nations, including Norway, Sweden, and France, have declined their invitations. Italy's economy minister cited constitutional concerns about joining a group led by another country's leader.
In the United Kingdom, Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper has expressed reservations about Russia's President Vladimir Putin receiving an invitation. Neither Russia nor China have indicated whether they will accept their invitations, adding further uncertainty to the board's composition.
Relationship with the United Nations
The Board of Peace's potential impact on the United Nations represents perhaps the most significant concern for many world leaders. President Trump has openly discussed the board replacing certain UN functions and potentially making the international body obsolete over time. He has criticised the UN for not living up to its potential while simultaneously suggesting it should continue existing because of that potential.
This tension reflects broader debates about international governance structures and their effectiveness in addressing contemporary global challenges. While concerns about UN effectiveness have grown in recent years, there appears to be limited appetite among world leaders for creating an alternative body that might undermine the existing international system.
The Board of Peace continues to take shape against this complex diplomatic backdrop, with its ultimate role in global conflict resolution and its relationship with established international institutions remaining subjects of intense international discussion and scrutiny.
