Trump Signed His Gaza ‘Board of Peace’ Into Being. Here’s Who’s on It — and Who Isn’t
Trump unveils his ambitious international peace initiative at Davos, aiming to stabilize Gaza — but major global powers remain on the sidelines
In a dramatic diplomatic moment at the 2026 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, U.S. President Donald Trump signed the formal charter establishing the Board of Peace, an international body he says will work to end conflicts — beginning with Gaza — and promote global stability. The signing drew significant international attention, not just for its ambitious goals, but for the lineup of supporters and detractors, and the controversy surrounding who is on the board — and who isn’t.
Trump described the Board of Peace as a potentially “historic” institution that could rival the United Nations in conflict resolution and peacebuilding. He asserted that the Board would help heal war‑torn regions, starting with Gaza and expanding to other parts of the world, and claimed the world was “richer, safer and more peaceful” than a year prior.
However, the initiative has been met with mixed reactions. While some nations have embraced the board, others — especially major Western allies — have kept their distance or outright refused to participate, raising questions about its legitimacy and long‑term prospects.
---
What Is the Board of Peace?
Originally proposed as part of Trump’s 20‑point plan to end the war in Gaza and rebuild the devastated territory, the Board of Peace was later codified in an 11‑page charter signed at Davos. Despite its origins in the Gaza conflict, the charter surprisingly does not mention Gaza explicitly, opting instead for a broader mission: “to promote stability, restore dependable and lawful governance, and secure enduring peace in areas affected or threatened by conflict.”
The organizational structure is multi‑tiered:
Chairman: Donald Trump — the charter names him as chair with significant authority, including the power to invite members and shape the board’s mission.
Main Board: Heads of state or senior representatives from invited countries.
Executive Board: A smaller group of appointed senior figures tasked with implementing core functions.
Gaza Executive Board & National Committee: A subsidiary layer meant to oversee Gaza’s administrative transition.
The initiative also envisions an International Stabilization Force (ISF) to oversee disarmament and maintain peace in the region, combined with mechanisms to attract investment and governance reforms.
---
Who’s In — Countries and Leaders Supporting the Board
Despite early skepticism, a number of countries have pledged to join or signed the board charter:
Regional and Global Participants
According to diplomatic sources tracking the commitments:
Argentina
Armenia
Azerbaijan
Bahrain
Belarus
Bulgaria
Egypt
Hungary
Indonesia
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kosovo
Morocco
Mongolia
Pakistan
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
Turkey (Türkiye)
United Arab Emirates
Uzbekistan
Vietnam
and others.
Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif notably signed onto the board at the Davos ceremony, even as India chose to abstain from joining, illustrating the geopolitical divides in the region.
Across the Middle East and Asia, several foreign ministers jointly declared their intention to support the board’s mission, emphasizing ceasefire consolidation, humanitarian aid scaling, and reconstruction.
Executive Leadership and Influential Appointees
Beyond states, Trump appointed a core executive leadership in Washington:
Donald Trump — Chairman
Marco Rubio — U.S. Secretary of State
Jared Kushner — Senior adviser and Trump's son‑in‑law
Steve Witkoff — U.S. Middle East envoy
Tony Blair — Former UK Prime Minister
Ajay Banga — President of the World Bank Group
Marc Rowan — CEO of Apollo Global Management
Robert Gabriel — Deputy National Security Adviser
These leaders will steer the executive operations of the board and manage strategic initiatives like investment, regional relations, and governance reforms.
---
Who’s Out — and Why Some Refuse to Join
Despite Trump’s hopes for broad participation, several major global powers have declined or stalled on joining:
Western European Countries
United Kingdom
France
Norway
Sweden
Slovenia
These nations have publicly resisted joining, citing concerns that the Board might undercut the United Nations, lack necessary legal frameworks, or distract from established multilateral conflict resolution mechanisms.
Uncommitted Invitees
A number of influential states have been invited but have not committed publicly:
China
Germany
India (abstained)
Russia
Singapore
Ukraine
European Union institutions
Their hesitation reflects unease over Trump’s goals, governance structure, and potential overreach of this new body into traditional UN peacekeeping roles.
---
Criticism and Controversy
A central point of criticism is that the Board’s charter doesn’t specifically reference Gaza — fueling skepticism that it’s evolving into a broader geopolitical platform rather than a focused peace mechanism. Additionally, Western allies have voiced concerns that it may compete with established international bodies like the United Nations, whose legitimacy and neutrality they consider essential.
Some analysts view Trump’s personal chairmanship and the lack of Palestinian representation at the highest levels as problematic, suggesting that the board may lack local legitimacy. Others warn that tying permanent membership to large financial contributions could reward wealthier states while sidelining those most affected by conflict.
---
Looking Ahead
As the Board of Peace begins operations, its effectiveness remains untested. With a mix of enthusiastic supporters, cautious participants, and outright skeptics, the initiative faces a long road ahead — both in Gaza and on the global diplomatic stage. Whether it can deliver peace, rebuild war‑shattered regions, and command respect alongside or in place of existing international institutions will shape its legacy in years to come.
About the Creator
Keep reading
More stories from Salaar Jamali and writers in The Swamp and other communities.
US Touts ‘New Gaza’ Filled With Luxury Real Estate: A Vision of Reconstruction or Controversy in the Making?
The Gaza Strip — long synonymous with conflict, humanitarian crises, and geopolitical complexity — is suddenly at the center of a bold U.S.‑led vision that might seem almost surreal to many: a future “New Gaza” filled with luxury real estate, high‑rise towers, seaside promenades, and economic opportunity. This plan, unveiled by U.S. officials at the World Economic Forum in Davos, has captivated global attention not just for its scope but for the immense social, political, and ethical questions it raises.
By Salaar Jamaliabout 10 hours ago in The Swamp
Grave Image Starmer.
According to Beth Rigby of Sky News, she has never seen the UK Prime Minister look so troubled. Sir Keir stood at the podium in the Downing Street Newsroom, delivering a message of a serious split in opinion between the UK and the US. Beth described the prime minister's face as grave. In her words, this press briefing by the prime minister is the most serious crisis in the so-called special relationship between the UK and the US in years.
By Nicholas Bishop3 days ago in The Swamp
UK Will Not Be Joining Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’ for Now, Says Yvette Cooper
The UK has decided not to join U.S. President Donald Trump’s “Board of Peace” initiative — at least not yet. Yvette Cooper, the UK’s Foreign Secretary, confirmed this during the World Economic Forum in Davos, citing concerns over Russian President Vladimir Putin’s potential involvement. This announcement highlights growing tensions in global politics, as Western nations weigh their response to international peace initiatives that include controversial figures. What Is the ‘Board of Peace’? President Trump introduced the “Board of Peace” at the 2026 World Economic Forum. Originally designed to oversee reconstruction and governance in Gaza, it has quickly expanded into a broader conflict resolution forum. The board aims to bring together world leaders, business figures, and diplomats to work on post-conflict strategies, with the potential to influence peace negotiations beyond just the Middle East. Trump has pitched it as a prestigious, high-level body, almost like an alternative to the United Nations. However, its powers, structure, and authority are still unclear, raising questions about how it might overlap with existing international institutions. Why the UK Is Hesitant Yvette Cooper stressed that while the UK supports peace efforts, it is not ready to join the board yet. She emphasized concerns over Putin’s involvement, noting that it would be problematic for a leader actively involved in conflict in Ukraine to be part of a peace initiative. “We have concerns about President Putin being part of something that talks about peace while his forces are still active in Ukraine,” Cooper said. Other issues include legal and diplomatic questions about the board’s charter and the roles of participating countries. For London, joining prematurely could risk legitimizing decisions without proper international oversight. The Diplomatic Landscape The UK is not alone in its caution. Other Western countries, including France, Sweden, and Norway, have also declined to join the board at this stage. Their reasoning is similar: while they support peace efforts, they do not want to see a new body undermine established institutions like the United Nations. Meanwhile, Trump has invited several prominent figures to the board, including U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, adviser Jared Kushner, and former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair. Critics argue that the board leans heavily toward U.S. influence, raising doubts about its impartiality. UK Foreign Policy Considerations The UK’s decision reflects its ongoing balancing act between: Supporting peace in the Middle East, Upholding Ukrainian sovereignty, and Ensuring international law is respected. Cooper highlighted that the board’s treaty raises broader legal issues, and the UK wants to ensure alignment with existing international frameworks before committing. This cautious approach also signals London’s long-term diplomatic strategy: engage in global initiatives without compromising principles or legitimacy. What’s Next for the Board of Peace? For now, the UK is stepping back, but that doesn’t mean it will permanently reject participation. Dialogue with allies is ongoing, and the UK remains interested in supporting peace initiatives — just not through a board that includes controversial leaders or unresolved legal questions. Trump, meanwhile, continues to push his initiative in Davos, with both support and criticism from the international community. Whether the board will evolve into a credible global peace instrument or deepen divisions between countries remains to be seen. Takeaway The UK’s cautious approach highlights the complexities of modern diplomacy. Supporting peace is easy in principle, but navigating global politics — especially when controversial figures are involved — requires careful consideration. For now, Yvette Cooper and the UK are making it clear: peace initiatives must be credible, lawful, and legitimate. Anything less risks undermining both international trust and long-term global stability. This blog format keeps the content easy to read, engaging, and structured for online audiences, while staying informative and authoritative.
By Aqib Hussainabout 15 hours ago in The Swamp
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.