Trump’s Board of Peace Faces Legitimacy Concerns Over Palestinian Exclusion
The inaugural meeting of U.S. President Donald Trump’s Board of Peace, convened on February 19, 2026, at the U.S. Institute of Peace in Washington, D.C., has sparked debate regarding its potential effectiveness due to the conspicuous absence of key Palestinian representatives. Even as President Trump pledged $10 billion towards the Board’s initiatives , analysts and Palestinians express skepticism about achieving meaningful progress without the direct involvement of those most affected.
Exclusion of Key Palestinian Actors
The Board of Peace meeting included representatives from Israel and the Palestinian National Committee for Gaza, but notably excluded the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, as well as other significant Palestinian factions. This omission has raised concerns about the initiative’s legitimacy and its ability to address the core challenges facing the region.
Concerns Over Legitimacy and Representation
Palestinian political analysts argue that formulating solutions without the participation of those directly impacted is a critical flaw. Mustafa Ibrahim, a Gaza-based political analyst, emphasized that excluding legitimate Palestinian actors is a “political mistake that could deepen already existing internal divisions and further erode public trust” . He stressed that genuine political ownership requires meaningful participation from all relevant parties.
Hussam Al-Dajani, another analyst in Gaza, highlighted the psychological impact of exclusion, stating that Palestinians feel like “mere observers, not decision-makers.” The presence of Israel without equivalent Palestinian representation signals a disregard for Palestinian realities and risks public rejection of any resulting agreements.
Humanitarian Concerns and Daily Realities
Analysts likewise point out that policies developed without Palestinian input may fail to address the urgent humanitarian needs of residents in Gaza and the West Bank, including issues like electricity shortages, food insecurity, and access to healthcare. Ahed Ferwana, a Gaza-based political analyst, noted that any plan drafted without Palestinian involvement would likely fail to reflect the daily needs of the population.
Questions About Implementation and Future Stability
The reliance on the Palestinian National Committee for Gaza, a temporary administrative body with limited authority, alongside Israel’s presence, is seen as an attempt to bypass traditional Palestinian institutions. Abdel Majid Sweilem, an analyst from the West Bank, argued that this renders the Board illegitimate and creates the impression of externally imposed decisions.
Ordinary Palestinians have also expressed skepticism. Ayman Al-Zaarab, from Gaza, described the meeting as “words on paper” that did not address the fundamental problems facing the region. Khaled Al-Salam, from the Nuseirat refugee camp, expressed a lack of trust in the process, stating that such meetings rarely translate into tangible improvements on the ground.
Trump’s Stance and U.S. Commitment
President Trump opened the meeting by praising board members and criticizing U.S. Allies who have not yet joined the initiative, accusing them of “playing cute.” He announced a $10 billion contribution from the United States to the Board of Peace, though it remains unclear whether this has been formally approved by Congress.
The Board of Peace, as part of Phase Two of Trump’s U.N.-endorsed 20-point peace plan for Gaza, aims to address global conflicts. However, concerns remain regarding the potential influence of authoritarian governments due to reports that permanent membership may be granted to countries contributing $1 billion in cash within the first year.