In a move that has sparked both hope and controversy, President Donald Trump is set to convene the first meeting of his ambitious Board of Peace, bringing together representatives from over two dozen countries—and notably, some who have chosen to stay away. This inaugural gathering, scheduled for Thursday in Washington, aims to tackle the monumental task of reconstructing Gaza and establishing an international stabilization force in the war-torn region, where a fragile ceasefire hangs in the balance. But here's where it gets controversial: Trump’s vision for the board has expanded far beyond its original scope, now aiming not only to broker lasting peace between Israel and Hamas but also to address global conflicts, raising eyebrows among U.S. allies and international observers alike.
Trump has announced that board members have pledged a staggering $5 billion for Gaza’s reconstruction—a significant sum, yet just a fraction of the estimated $70 billion needed to rebuild the Palestinian territory after two years of devastating war. Additionally, countries are expected to commit thousands of personnel to international stabilization and police forces. “We have the greatest leaders in the world joining the Board of Peace,” Trump declared earlier this week. “This could be the most consequential board ever assembled.”
Originally part of Trump’s 20-point peace plan for Gaza, the board’s mission has evolved dramatically since the October ceasefire. Now, Trump envisions it as a global conflict-resolution powerhouse, a shift that has fueled concerns among some U.S. allies. Critics worry that this expanded role could position the board as a rival to the United Nations, a fear Trump himself seemed to acknowledge when he urged the U.N. to “get on the ball.” “The United Nations has great potential, but they haven’t lived up to it,” he remarked.
And this is the part most people miss: While over 40 countries and the European Union have confirmed their attendance at Thursday’s meeting, several key allies, including Germany, Italy, Norway, and Switzerland, have opted to participate only as observers, underscoring their skepticism. The U.N. Security Council, meanwhile, held its own high-level meeting on the Gaza ceasefire and Israel’s West Bank policies a day earlier, a scheduling move widely seen as a response to Trump’s board meeting.
The Vatican has also weighed in, with Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin emphasizing that the U.N. should remain the primary body managing international crises. The Trump administration, however, has brushed off these concerns. “This president has a bold and ambitious plan to rebuild Gaza, and the Board of Peace is making it a reality,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated. U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz echoed this sentiment, arguing that the board is “not talking, it is doing” and dismissing critics who label its structure as unconventional.
But here’s the real sticking point: A central focus of Thursday’s discussions will be the creation of an armed international stabilization force to maintain security and disarm Hamas, a key Israeli demand and a cornerstone of the ceasefire. Yet, so far, only Indonesia has made a firm commitment to this force, and Hamas has shown little willingness to disarm. A U.S. official acknowledged the challenges, stating, “We’re under no illusions about the difficulties, but we’re encouraged by what mediators are telling us.”
Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto has pledged to collaborate with other leading Islamic nations invited by Trump, stating, “We recognize the obstacles, but we must try and do our best.” Meanwhile, the Gaza Executive Board, the operational arm of the larger board, is expected to provide updates on its efforts to establish a functioning government and services in the territory.
The meeting’s speakers will include high-profile figures such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and Nickolay Mladenov, the board’s high representative. Yet, despite the star-studded lineup, skepticism persists. Michael Hanna of the International Crisis Group notes that without clear authorization for the board’s expanded mandate, it’s no surprise that many U.S. allies have declined to join. Instead, he suggests, those who have signed up are likely aiming to focus U.S. attention on Gaza and leverage Trump’s influence with Israel.
So, here’s the question that’s bound to spark debate: Is Trump’s Board of Peace a bold step toward global peace, or does it risk undermining established international institutions like the U.N.? And can it truly deliver on its ambitious promises, especially in a region as complex as Gaza? Let us know your thoughts in the comments—this is one conversation you won’t want to miss.
