Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’: Why India and Russia Are Being Courted — and Why the Invitation Raises Red Flags

India and Russia have now joined a growing list of countries invited to become members of the Trump-led “Board of Peace”, a body originally conceived to oversee Gaza’s post-war transition but which appears to be evolving into something far more ambitious — and controversial.

While the invitations signal Washington’s attempt to broaden international buy-in for Gaza’s reconstruction, the charter of the proposed body suggests a fundamental reimagining of global conflict management, one that sidelines existing multilateral institutions and places extraordinary authority in the hands of a single individual: Donald Trump.

From Gaza Mechanism to “Parallel UN”

The idea of the Board of Peace first emerged in September last year, when Trump unveiled a 20-point peace plan for Gaza.

The proposal envisioned the war-ravaged territory being placed under a temporary technocratic Palestinian administration, supervised by an international body — the Board of Peace — with Trump himself as its head.

At the time, the Board was:

• Limited to Gaza
• Temporary, with a mandate ending in 2027
• Approved by the United Nations, including endorsement by the UN Security Council

Four months later, however, the charter circulated to invited nations, tells a very different story.

The Board is now described as a “new International Organization and Transitional Governing Administration”, tasked not only with stabilising Gaza but also with resolving global conflicts, including those merely “threatened by conflict” — a phrase left undefined.

Critics say this transformation effectively creates a “parallel United Nations”, without the checks, balances, or representative legitimacy of existing multilateral bodies like the

United Nations.India and Russia: Strategic Invitations

India was invited on Sunday, while Russia’s invitation was confirmed a day later by the Kremlin. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said Vladimir Putin had received the proposal through diplomatic channels and that Moscow was reviewing it.

Invitations have also gone out to countries across geopolitical divides — including Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, Hungary, Argentina, Greece, Australia, and Vietnam — suggesting an effort to give the Board global legitimacy.

So far, Hungary is the only country to publicly confirm acceptance.

For both India and Russia, the invitation presents a diplomatic dilemma:

• Accepting could mean influence over Gaza’s reconstruction and broader peace initiatives.
• Rejecting could alienate Washington at a time of shifting global alliances.
• Accepting without conditions could imply consent to an institution dominated by Trump personally, not by the US government or international consensus.

A Chairman Above the System

Perhaps the most striking feature of the charter is its governance structure.

Trump is namedthe inaugural Chairman of the Board of Peace in his personal capacity, separate from his role as US President. The charter states:

• The chairman can only be removed if he resigns voluntarily
• Or if he is unanimously declared incapacitated by an Executive Board composed largely of his own appointees
• Even then, his chosen successor takes over

This means that any country joining the Board would legally bind itself to an organisation led by Trump even if he is no longer President of the United States.

Membership requires explicit consent “to be bound by this Charter” — a clause that raises sovereignty concerns for participating states.

Money, Membership, and Power

The charter introduces another contentious element: tiered membership.

• Three-year membership: No mandatory financial contribution
• Permanent membership: Requires a $1 billion payment in the first year

According to US officials quoted by AP, these funds would go toward rebuilding Gaza. However, critics argue this structure effectively monetises permanence and influence, something unheard of in established international organisations.

Who Runs the Board?

The proposed Executive Board reads like a mix of political power, business influence, and Western establishment figures:

• US Secretary of State Marco Rubio
• US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff
• Jared Kushner
• Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair
• World Bank President Ajay Banga
• US National Security Adviser Robert Gabriel
• American billionaire Marc Rowan

While the presence of global figures lends weight, it also reinforces concerns that the Board is US-centric and personality-driven, rather than representative.

Gaza First, World Next?

Officially, the Board is positioned as a mechanism to demilitarise Gaza and rebuild the territory after a devastating two-year war between Israel and Hamas.

Unofficially, the language of the charter signals much larger ambitions — replacing what Trump has repeatedly dismissed as “failed institutions” with a more “nimble” peace architecture under his leadership.

For India and Russia — both staunch defenders of state sovereignty and UN primacy — the question is not just about Gaza.

It is about whether joining the Board of Peace means endorsing a new global order shaped less by institutions and more by individuals.

#BoardOfPeace #DonaldTrump #IndiaDiplomacy #RussiaForeignPolicy #GazaReconstruction #ParallelUN #GlobalGovernance #UNSecurityCouncil #Geopolitics