Trump’s Board of Peace: A ‘Pay-to-Play’ Club or a Path to Gaza Reconstruction?

President Donald Trump’s newly formed Board of Peace convened its inaugural meeting on February 19, 2026, with pledges totaling $7 billion for Gaza reconstruction and a $10 billion commitment from the United States. However, the initiative has drawn criticism, with some observers characterizing it as a vehicle for influence peddling and a potential circumvention of the United Nations.

$10 Billion U.S. Commitment and International Pledges

During the meeting, Trump announced the U.S. Would contribute $10 billion to the Board of Peace, though he did not specify the source of these funds . Nine member nations pledged a combined $7 billion towards a Gaza relief package . The board aims to not only address the situation in Gaza but too intervene in “hot spots” around the world .

Concerns Over Transparency and Influence

The Board of Peace has faced scrutiny regarding its structure and membership. Reports suggest that permanent membership may be granted to countries contributing $1 billion in cash within the first year, raising concerns about the potential for authoritarian governments to gain undue influence . Critics have labeled the board a “club pay to play” and an “imperial court,” alleging it undermines the UN’s role in resolving the Gaza crisis .

Membership and International Reactions

The Board’s membership includes Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Israel, Kuwait, Morocco, Qatar, Albania, Belarus, Bulgaria, Kosovo, Hungary, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Cambodia, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Pakistan, Turkey, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Argentina, Paraguay, and El Salvador . Several key U.S. Allies have hesitated to participate, citing concerns about the board’s structure and potential to sideline the United Nations .

Italy’s Role and Constitutional Questions

Italy’s participation as an observer has also sparked debate, with questions raised about its constitutionality. Foreign Minister Tajani argued that Italy’s absence from discussions regarding peace in the Mediterranean would be politically and constitutionally problematic . However, concerns remain that full membership, requiring a $1 billion contribution, could represent a transfer of sovereignty to a single individual with potential conflicts of interest.

A Shift in International Order?

The Board of Peace initiative reflects a broader shift in the international order, with Trump seemingly unconcerned with concealing U.S. Interference in global affairs. Some analysts suggest this represents a return to 19th-century colonialism, where great powers divided territories without regard for sovereignty or local populations . This approach contrasts with the traditional emphasis on Western values and the Atlantic alliance, potentially straining relationships with European allies.