Donald Trump formally introduced a new international initiative known as the Board of Peace at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, stating that the war in Gaza was “nearing its end” and positioning the new body as a mechanism to oversee postwar stabilization and reconstruction.
According to U.S. officials, the Board of Peace is intended to supervise security arrangements, reconstruction planning, and governance coordination in Gaza, while also serving as a framework that could be applied to other conflicts internationally. The signing ceremony took place on the sidelines of the Davos meeting and included representatives from a limited group of countries.
The event highlighted divisions among U.S. allies. While several Middle Eastern, Asian, and Eastern European countries were represented, many Western governments were absent. During remarks at the ceremony, President Trump criticized Spain for declining to participate, accusing it of underinvesting in defense and relying on the security commitments of others. Spain and several other European states have either rejected the invitation outright or said they require additional time to assess the proposal.
Countries represented at the signing included Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bulgaria, Hungary, Indonesia, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Mongolia, Morocco, Pakistan, Paraguay, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, and Uzbekistan. Their participation reflects a concentration of support from regions directly involved in Middle Eastern diplomacy, emerging economies, and select Eastern European states.
In contrast, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Sweden, Slovenia, and Norway did not send representatives. Officials from several of these countries cited concerns related to governance structure, legitimacy, and coordination with existing international institutions. The United Kingdom also declined to participate at this stage. UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper told the BBC that the government would not be among the initial signatories, citing unresolved issues, including the potential involvement of Russia.
Russia’s possible participation has emerged as a point of controversy. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov confirmed earlier in the week that President Vladimir Putin had received an invitation and was reviewing the proposal, though no Russian delegation attended the Davos signing. U.S. Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff said in a separate interview that discussions with Russian officials were expected, adding that Moscow had requested talks regarding possible involvement.
France and Germany have both indicated that they will not join the Board at this time. German media reported that internal Foreign Ministry assessments raised legal and constitutional concerns, while French officials expressed skepticism about the Board’s mandate and structure. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni signaled conditional openness but said further review was necessary before Italy could commit. Belgium’s foreign minister stated that her government shared the reservations of other European partners and favored a coordinated European response. Sweden, Slovenia, and Norway also declined participation, according to local media reports.
The Board of Peace received endorsement from the United Nations Security Council in November as part of a broader framework connected to Gaza’s postwar recovery. While initially conceived as a body focused on Gaza, its mandate has since expanded. U.S. officials now describe the Board as a standing international organization aimed at addressing global conflict resolution and post-conflict transitions beyond the Middle East.
Israel was not represented at the signing ceremony, although multiple reports indicate that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has agreed in principle to join the Board at a later stage.
Palestinian officials have expressed conditional willingness to engage with the initiative. Mohammed Mustafa, Prime Minister of the Palestinian National Authority, said at a Davos panel discussion that his government intends to work with the Board and its leadership while continuing to prepare Palestinian institutions for reconstruction. He emphasized the importance of maintaining Palestinian governance structures and long-term development priorities.
The White House announced last week the formation of a founding Executive Board, tasked with implementing the Board of Peace’s objectives. The Executive Board includes:
- Marco Rubio, U.S. Secretary of State
- Steve Witkoff, U.S. Special Envoy to the Middle East
- Jared Kushner, former senior White House adviser
- Sir Tony Blair, former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
- Marc Rowan, Chief Executive Officer of Apollo Global Management
- Ajay Banga, President of the World Bank
- Robert Gabriel, U.S. national security adviser
Supporters of the initiative argue that combining diplomatic leadership with financial and development expertise could accelerate reconstruction and enforcement of post-conflict agreements. Critics have raised concerns that the structure could centralize decision-making among wealthy states and private actors, potentially sidelining multilateral institutions and local governance frameworks.
President Trump initially proposed the Board of Peace in September as part of a second phase of a U.S.-brokered Gaza ceasefire plan. Since then, the proposal has expanded significantly. A draft charter obtained by U.S. media describes the Board as an international organization intended to promote stability, peace, and governance in regions affected by or at risk of conflict. The draft does not reference Gaza directly.
Under the proposed structure, Trump would serve as chair of the Board indefinitely, potentially beyond his second term. Member states would hold three-year terms, after which they could secure permanent membership by contributing $1 billion. U.S. officials have said funds raised would be directed toward reconstruction efforts in Gaza, though some critics have warned the financing model could be vulnerable to misuse.
Trump has stated publicly that the Board “might” replace the United Nations, a comment that has intensified concerns among diplomats about the initiative’s long-term implications for the existing international system. The Board’s charter refers to unnamed global institutions that have “too often failed,” language that observers interpret as a critique of the U.N. framework.
U.N. officials have sought to clarify that the Board of Peace does not replace the United Nations. Tom Fletcher, the U.N.’s top humanitarian official, told CNN that the organization would continue to operate independently of the Board.
As the Board of Peace moves toward implementation, questions remain about its legitimacy, scope, and relationship to existing international institutions. Its effectiveness will likely depend on how it addresses representation, accountability, and coordination in the months ahead.
