This is not just about a region in this world where human rights are not given, and people are being killed. It is about humanity, life, and the very foundations of values that humans are living with. When Gaza is discussed today, it is rarely in the language of rights. It is discussed as a problem to be solved, a territory to be stabilized, and a population to be administered.
The announcement of a new international “Board of Peace” fits neatly into this pattern. Presented as a bold initiative to guide Gaza out of conflict and into reconstruction, the Board of Peace has been framed by its sponsors as innovative, inclusive, and forward-looking. Yet for Palestinians, the announcement raises an older, still unresolved question: Who decides Gaza’s future, and on what authority?
What Is the Board of Peace?
The Board of Peace was announced by US President Donald Trump as part of a broader Phase Two Gaza plan, marking a shift from ceasefire management to post-genocide governance and reconstruction.
According to official descriptions, the board is meant to:
- Oversee Gaza’s political transition
- Coordinate reconstruction funding and investment
- Provide international supervision during a “transitional” period
Trump declared himself chair of the board and described it as a high-level body composed of political leaders, financial figures, and diplomatic actors. Unlike the United Nations, the board has no clear treaty basis, no General Assembly mandate, and no defined accountability mechanism.
It is powerful not because it is formal, but because it is backed by money, political leverage, and security control.
Who is on the Board?
The individuals named or referenced in connection with the Board of Peace are not neutral facilitators.
The board’s executive circle includes:
- Marco Rubio, US Senator and the Secretary of State
- Tony Blair, former UK prime minister
- Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and former Middle East envoy
- Steve Witkoff, US real estate magnate and political donor
- Ajay Banga, President of the World Bank
These are figures associated with Western political power, financial institutions, and security-centric diplomacy. None are elected Palestinian representatives. None comes from Gaza. The imbalance is structural, not incidental.
Which Countries Were Invited?
One of the board’s defining features is its attempt to project global legitimacy through invited state participation.
According to credible sources, Trump sent invitations to around 60 world leaders. Those explicitly named in reporting include:
- Turkey (President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan)
- Egypt (President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi)
- Canada (Prime Minister Mark Carney)
- Argentina (President Javier Milei)
Moreover, some diplomatic sources also indicate the list includes:
- Britain
- Germany
- Italy
- Morocco
- Indonesia
- Australia
The Palestinian Face of the Plan: Who Is Ali Shaath?
To provide the plan with Palestinian leadership, the US has backed Ali Shaath as head of the transitional Palestinian committee that will administer Gaza’s civil affairs under the Board of Peace.
Shaath’s profile is central to understanding how this governance model is being sold.
Here is a quick overview of Ali Shaath:
- He was born in 1958 in Khan Younis
- He is a civil engineer with a PhD from Queen’s University Belfast
- He previously served as deputy minister of planning in the Palestinian Authority
- He has worked on industrial zone projects in both Gaza and the West Bank
Shaath has spoken publicly about the scale of Gaza’s destruction, estimating around 68 million tons of rubble, much of it contaminated with unexploded ordnance. He has suggested that clearing debris could take three years, with full recovery achievable in seven years. It seems to be a far more optimistic timeline than UN estimates, which warn that rebuilding could extend beyond 2040.
Politically, Shaath has been described as acceptable to both Hamas and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, precisely because he is positioned as a technocrat rather than a political leader. However, it is yet to be observed how he would work with the other members.
Governance Without Sovereignty
The Palestinian committee, chaired by Shaath, has issued a mission statement pledging to restore services, rebuild infrastructure, and stabilize daily life in Gaza.
The committee describes its work as “rooted in peace” and focused on technocratic administration rather than politics.
Yet the committee:
- Controls no borders
- Commands no security forces
- Regulates no airspace or coastline
- Has no electoral mandate
It governs without power, while power remains in external hands.
When it comes to the reaction of the people of Gaza, they showed mixed feelings of skepticism over hope. Some Palestinians express cautious hope that any plan might bring electricity, water, and an end to constant displacement. Others see the Board of Peace as another externally designed structure that manages Gaza without addressing the occupation.
Peace Architecture or Power Management?
The Board of Peace is being presented as an innovation. However, history offers a cautionary lens.
Temporary governance structures in occupied or post-conflict territories have a habit of becoming permanent. Reconstruction becomes conditional. Aid becomes leverage. Administration replaces self-determination.
In a nutshell, the Board of Peace asks the world to believe that stability can precede justice, and that governance can substitute for freedom.
For Palestinians, the unanswered question is simpler and older:
If Gaza’s future is designed in Washington, financed in global capitals, and overseen by external boards—where does Palestinian self-determination actually begin?
Until that question is addressed, the Board of Peace risks becoming not a new architecture for peace, but another structure built on the same imbalance that has kept Gaza unfree for decades.
Peace cannot be outsourced, and a people cannot be rebuilt while being brutally ruled.
