Trump’s Board of Peace: A Recent Model for International Governance or a Profitable Occupation?
In the wake of the inaugural Board of Peace session in Washington on February 19, 2026, a controversial new approach to international governance has emerged. Initially presented as a humanitarian effort for Gaza, the initiative is increasingly viewed as a corporate-style restructuring of a distressed asset, raising concerns about sovereignty and the future of international diplomacy.
From Humanitarian Aid to Corporate Restructuring
The Board of Peace, spearheaded by President Donald Trump, aims to rebuild the Gaza Strip. However, critics argue that the centralization of power within a donor-driven board, while excluding the Palestinian people, bypasses traditional diplomatic channels and attempts to replace the concept of a nation-state with a boardroom-style governance model.
Financial Disparities and Unequal Representation
Rebuilding Gaza is estimated to cost at least $70 billion, with an immediate need of $20 billion for baseline operations, according to United Nations estimates. The Board of Peace has secured $17 billion in pledges, including $10 billion from the United States and $7 billion from an Arab coalition. However, the financial structure is marked by inequalities. Israel has a seat on the board without paying the $1 billion membership fee required of other nations and, according to Israeli Minister Ze’ev Elkin, will not contribute financially to the reconstruction of Gaza, despite reducing the territory to 70 million tonnes of rubble.
A Technocratic Solution with Limited Accountability
The newly formed National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), led by Dr. Ali Shaath, is presented as a technocratic solution. However, Shaath and his eleven commissioners do not report to a Palestinian electorate or the Palestinian Authority. Instead, they operate under the guidance of the Gaza Executive Board, which includes figures like Jared Kushner and former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair.
The “Gaza Riviera” and Spatial Engineering
The “Gaza Riviera” master plan, featuring 180 skyscrapers and data centers, has sparked criticism for prioritizing real estate development over the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people. By planning to erase northern cities like Jabalya to make way for industrial parks, the plan is seen as treating the map of Gaza as a blank slate for speculation rather than recognizing it as a homeland. This approach ignores the need for self-determination and the importance of preserving national identity.
Coercive Diplomacy and Transatlantic Relations
The Trump administration has employed what some describe as “coercive diplomacy” to pressure skeptical allies into joining the Board of Peace, threatening a 200 percent tariff on French wine, and champagne. This move has strained transatlantic relations and suggests that participation in the Board is not merely about Gaza, but about enforcing a new global alignment where trade access is contingent on diplomatic compliance.
The International Stabilisation Force and the Risk of Permanent Occupation
Security for this new order will be provided by the International Stabilisation Force (ISF), a non-UN sanctioned body commanded by US Major General Jasper Jeffers III. While Indonesia has pledged 8,000 troops to the force by June 2026, the ISF’s mandate – “the establishment of a terror-free environment” – is considered vague. Without a clear political horizon or a path to a Palestinian state, the ISF risks becoming a permanent security force maintaining a high-tech open-air prison.
The Commodification of Dignity and the Need for Sovereignty
The Board of Peace’s fundamental flaw lies in its belief that dignity can be commodified. True stability cannot be achieved through skyscrapers if it is built on the ruins of sovereignty. Until the Board addresses the core issue of Palestinian statehood, its “Gaza Riviera” will remain a facade for a potentially permanent and profitable occupation. Peace, is a political right, not a business deal.