The international community is closely watching the development of the “Board of Peace,” a proposed initiative spearheaded by former US President Donald Trump aimed at overseeing Gaza’s postwar transition. While initially presented as focused on Gaza, leaked documents suggest a far broader scope for the organization, raising questions about its legal authority and relationship with existing international bodies like the United Nations. This article breaks down what is known about the Board of Peace, its potential powers, and the concerns it has sparked.
What is the Board of Peace and What Has Been Announced?
On January 16th, the White House confirmed the creation of the Board of Peace as part of Trump’s 20-point plan for Gaza. An executive board has been formed to implement the project, including prominent figures such as US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Trump’s special Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner, former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, World Bank President Ajay Banga, and business executive Marc Rowan. Additionally, the plan includes a Gaza executive board and an International Stabilisation Force to aid in security and reconstruction efforts.
The stated goal of the Board of Peace is to coordinate funding, reconstruction, and stabilization efforts in Gaza following the current conflict. However, recent revelations have broadened the understanding of Trump’s vision for the organization.
Expanding Ambitions: The Leaked Charter
A document published by the Times of Israel, reportedly attached to invitation letters sent to world leaders, describes the Board of Peace as an “international organization” with a mission to promote stability and peace in “areas affected or threatened by conflict” globally. This suggests ambitions extending far beyond the immediate needs of Gaza.
The charter outlines membership terms, limiting initial terms to three years unless a member contributes over $1 billion (€854 million) in “cash funds.” Invitation letters sent to Argentinian President Javier Milei and Paraguayan leader Santiago Peña further indicate this wider scope. A senior official told the Associated Press that the expanded role is currently “aspirational,” but Trump’s team believes it’s achievable, citing frustrations with the UN’s effectiveness.
UN Resolution and the Board’s Current Mandate
In November 2023, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 2803, which addresses the Board of Peace in the context of Gaza. The resolution endorses Trump’s plan to end the Gaza conflict, specifically establishing the Board as a transitional administration for the Gaza Strip.
This resolution authorizes the Board to coordinate reconstruction, oversee a transitional administration, and facilitate humanitarian aid delivery. It also allows for the creation of an International Stabilisation Force operating under the Board’s direction. Crucially, the resolution limits the Board’s mandate to Gaza and sets an expiration date of December 31, 2027, requiring regular progress reports to the UN Security Council.
What Power Does the Board of Peace Actually Hold?
Currently, the Board of Peace possesses only one legally recognized mandate: to support Gaza’s postwar transition as defined by UN Security Council Resolution 2803. This mandate is geographically limited and temporary. While the leaked charter outlines a broader global role, legal experts argue this doesn’t automatically confer independent authority.
Aurel Sari, a professor of public international law at the University of Exeter, explained that states are free to create new international organizations, but they must “respect existing international law and legal commitments,” including those of the UN. He also highlighted the charter’s provision granting Donald Trump, as chair, veto authority over most Board decisions – a level of centralized control unprecedented in international institutions.
The charter’s requirement of only three states to activate the Board has also drawn criticism. Sari noted, “This is a remarkably small number… It raises the question whether such a small number of states can create an international organization with international legal personality.” Marko Milanović, a professor at the University of Reading, added that the Board’s powers would ultimately depend on state consent and any Security Council mandate.
Political Implications and Future Outlook
Despite questions surrounding its legal authority, the Board of Peace could have significant political ramifications. Analysts suggest the leaked charter reflects a growing trend away from multilateral institutions, a shift that could be “devastating,” according to Henrique Burnay, a consultant on European affairs. The Board’s influence will largely depend on which nations join and how it operates in practice.
Richard Gowan, programme director at International Crisis Group, believes the Board could become a multilateral agreement if states sign the charter. However, he emphasizes that interpreting the UN’s Gaza mandate as blanket approval for a global peace body would be “unprecedented.”
The future of the Board of Peace remains uncertain. Its success hinges on securing broader international support and navigating the complex legal landscape surrounding its expanded ambitions. Observers will be watching closely to see whether the organization can evolve beyond its initial Gaza focus and establish itself as a meaningful player in global conflict resolution, or if it will remain a largely symbolic initiative.
