Inaugural Board of Peace Meeting: Opportunities, but No Shortage of Challenges

Bottom Line Up Front

* U.S. President Donald Trump hosted the inaugural meeting of the Board of Peace yesterday in Washington, D.C., attended by more than two dozen world leaders.
* During the inaugural Board of Peace meeting, President Trump framed the war in Gaza as “effectively over,” despite ongoing ceasefire violations.
* From a geopolitical perspective, it is impossible to disaggregate the situation in Gaza from what is happening in the West Bank, as rampant instability in one theater inevitably spills over to the other.
* The Board of Peace has the potential to evolve into a successful coordination platform if it manages the myriad issues, but, absent that, it risks becoming diplomatic noise in an already overburdened geopolitical landscape.

Yesterday, U.S. President Donald Trump hosted the inaugural meeting of the Board of Peace (https://thesoufancenter.org/intelbrief-2026-february-11/) — the U.S.-led coalition designed to oversee redevelopment in Gaza — in Washington, D.C., attended by more than two dozen world leaders. The meeting was intended to mobilize reconstruction for Gaza, consolidate a post-war stabilization architecture, and align international partners behind a defined security and governance framework. Instead, the session revealed the complexities that will determine whether the initiative matures into a durable geopolitical mechanism or remains a politically symbolic forum operating against adverse conditions on the ground.

war in Gaza (https://thesoufancenter.org/intelbrief-2025-december-16/) as “effectively over,” despite ongoing ceasefire violations. During his speech, Trump also emphasized reconstruction and disarmament as the twin pillars of the next phase, linking international financial pledges directly to the dismantling of Hamas’s military capabilities. Trump also announced that the United States will contribute $10 billion towards reconstruction costs in the Gaza Strip, supplementing billions pledged by other participating states. Yet even taken together, these sums fall significantly short of the projected scale of rebuilding required, with independent estimates such as those from the UN placing reconstruction needs at around $70 billion.

More consequential than the funding shortfall is the sequencing dilemma at the heart of the reconstruction plan. Reconstruction is being conditioned on Hamas’s disarmament, yet disarmament presupposes a legitimate authority capable of exercising control inside Gaza. Reports indicate that the U.S.-backed National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG) has not been permitted to enter the territory.  Without credible administrative presence, reconstruction funds risk becoming inutile. The Gaza-centric focus of the board should be considered within the broader Israeli-Palestinian landscape, which remains highly unstable. In the West Bank (https://thesoufancenter.org/intelbrief-2023-november-15/) , violence has continued to escalate, and land registration measures complicate tangible next steps away from conflict. From a geopolitical perspective, it is impossible to disaggregate the situation in Gaza from what is happening in the West Bank. Rampant instability in one theater inevitably
spills over to the other. Donor states and regional actors will evaluate the sustainability of reconstruction efforts not only by the durability of the ceasefire in Gaza, but also by the trajectory of territorial, legal, and security developments across the Palestinian arena as a whole.

While the concept for the Board of Peace originated in the Trump administration’s 20-point Gaza ceasefire plan, endorsed by the UN Security Council, the Board has proved controversial. According to its charter, President Trump will serve as permanent chairman, even after leaving office, and will have sole authority to admit members and determine the Board’s direction. To achieve permanent membership, participants must purchase a seat for $1 billion. While Hungary’s Viktor Orbán (https://thesoufancenter.org/intelbrief-2022-april-7/) and Belarus’s Alexander Lukashenko have expressed a desire to become permanent members of the Board of Peace, most other EU countries have expressed concern over the body’s charter, which many feel threatens the UN’s own charter.

Yesterday’s meeting further revealed longstanding geopolitical divisions among the various constituents. Over 20 countries attended, but several major Western allies — including the United Kingdom, France, and Germany — either declined formal membership or sent lower-level envoys in their place. Overall, this demonstrates skepticism of the Board’s mandate and its relationship to existing multilateral structures. The Vatican also declined to participate, another sign that a politically driven framework could seriously attenuate the coordinating role of multilateral organizations, such as the United Nations, in humanitarian and peace operations. Paris publicly expressed concern that the European Commission attended as an observer, even without a “mandate” from EU member states.

However, overlaying these institutional questions is the Iran file, which President Trump explicitly folded into the day’s narrative. He reiterated that the United States seeks a “meaningful deal” on Iran’s nuclear program and suggested “bad things” will happen otherwise, noting the situation would likely be clearer “over the next probably 10 days.” Escalation with Iran (https://thesoufancenter.org/intelbrief-2026-february-19/) could unsettle Gulf states’ potential donorship to reconstruction efforts, and narrow the diplomatic bandwidth required to consolidate ceasefire and stabilization mechanisms. Conversely, failure to demonstrate resolve on the Iran file could weaken perceptions of U.S. leverage over actors embedded in the Gaza theater.

The Board of Peace’s inaugural meeting succeeded in mobilizing attention and generating headlines. However, Gaza’s reconstruction cannot be insulated from unresolved sovereignty questions, intra-Palestinian political fragmentation, Israeli security doctrine, West Bank volatility, and deepening U.S.–Iran tensions. The Board of Peace has the potential to evolve into a successful coordination platform if it manages these issues. Absent that, it risks becoming diplomatic noise added to an already overburdened geopolitical landscape.

https://x.com/TheSoufanCenter