The complex landscape of Middle East diplomacy has seen a significant development with the announcement of Trump’s Gaza peace plan, particularly concerning a proposed panel for post-war governance in the Palestinian territory. Israel has voiced strong objections to the composition of this Gaza executive board, which is intended to operate under former US President Donald Trump’s Board of Peace. This disagreement highlights the intricate challenges of establishing stability and a clear path forward for Gaza after years of conflict and extensive bombardment.
What is Trump’s Board of Peace? The Board of Peace is an initiative spearheaded by former US President Donald Trump, designed to oversee post-war governance and economic development in the Palestinian territories, particularly Gaza. It aims to address issues like reconstruction, investment, and regional relations, bringing together international leaders and experts to shape the future of the devastated region.
The controversy intensified on Saturday when Israel formally stated its objections to the line-up of the Gaza executive board. This panel, a subordinate entity to the broader Board of Peace, notably includes Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan and a Qatari official. The White House announced the board’s composition on Friday, sparking immediate concerns within the Israeli government regarding its alignment with their strategic interests.
Benjamin Netanyahu’s Gaza policy has consistently emphasized security and a direct role in any post-conflict arrangements. The Israeli Prime Minister’s office explicitly stated that the announcement regarding the Gaza Executive Board’s composition was “not coordinated with Israel and runs contrary to its policy.” This lack of coordination underscores the deep divisions that persist even among allies concerning the future administration of Gaza.
How to achieve post-war Gaza stability remains a central, unanswered question, with various international actors proposing different approaches. Trump, who declared himself the chair of the Board of Peace, promotes a vision centered on economic development and reconstruction in the Palestinian territory. However, the practicalities of implementing such a plan, especially given the extensive damage and political sensitivities, present formidable hurdles.
The Board of Peace itself began to take shape with invitations extended to leaders from Egypt, Turkey, Argentina, and Canada. Beyond these national leaders, Trump also named several key figures to the Board of Peace and the Gaza executive board, including his Secretary of State Marco Rubio, former British prime minister Tony Blair, and senior negotiators Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff. These appointments bring a mix of political experience and diplomatic acumen to the initiative.
Understanding the distinction between the Board of Peace vs Gaza executive board is crucial. The Board of Peace acts as the overarching body, setting broad policy and direction, while the Gaza executive board is tasked with the more granular, day-to-day implementation of governance and development initiatives within Gaza. This hierarchical structure is designed to streamline decision-making and project execution.
The international reception to these invitations has varied. While Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s senior aide indicated his intention to accept, and Argentine President Javier Milei expressed honor at the prospect, Egypt’s Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty noted that Cairo was still “studying” the request for President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi to join. Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was asked to be a “founding member,” highlighting the diverse regional and global involvement sought for this ambitious plan.
Tony Blair, a controversial figure in the Middle East due to his role in the 2003 invasion of Iraq, has accepted his appointment. His long history with the Israeli-Palestinian issue, having served as a representative of the “Middle East Quartet,” positions him as a key, albeit contentious, player. Trump’s previous comments about ensuring Blair was an “acceptable choice to everybody” reflect the delicate diplomatic tightrope being walked.
The White House outlined the comprehensive mandate of the Board of Peace, which includes critical areas such as “governance capacity-building, regional relations, reconstruction, investment attraction, large-scale funding and capital mobilization.” This broad scope indicates an intent to address not just immediate recovery but also long-term sustainable development, making a post-war Gaza governance guide essential for any stakeholders.
Further members of the board include World Bank President Ajay Banga, US financier Marc Rowan, and loyal Trump aide Robert Gabriel. However, not all reactions have been positive. The Palestinian militant group Islamic Jihad swiftly criticized the composition of the Board of Peace, asserting that it “came in accordance with Israeli criteria and to serve the interests of the occupation,” reflecting deep-seated distrust and ideological opposition.
The overall Trump’s Gaza plan vs Israeli policy reveals fundamental differences in approach and priorities for the devastated region. Washington’s plan has moved into a second phase, shifting focus from implementing a ceasefire to disarming Hamas. This includes the naming of US Major General Jasper Jeffers to head the International Stabilization Force, tasked with providing security and training a new police force to succeed Hamas, indicating a robust, security-first component to the international strategy.
Ultimately, the success of Trump’s Gaza peace plan hinges on navigating complex political dynamics, securing international buy-in, and addressing the profound humanitarian and infrastructural needs of Gaza. The ongoing disagreements, particularly from Israel, underscore the monumental challenges ahead in forging a truly stable and self-governing future for the Palestinian territory, making the path to peace an intricate and often contentious journey.
