World leaders are reacting with unease to US President Donald Trump’s newly unveiled ‘Board of Peace’ for Gaza, especially after reports that permanent membership could cost $1 billion. The move has stirred deep diplomatic concern just days before the World Economic Forum in Davos, where Trump is expected to promote the initiative.
While Trump frames the board as a bold solution to rebuild war-torn Gaza and support lasting peace, many countries are questioning its structure, funding model and transparency. The controversy highlights broader tensions over international peacebuilding and the future role of traditional institutions, such as the UN.
What is the Board of Peace & Why $1 Billion?
The Board of Peace is a new international body proposed by the Trump administration to oversee reconstruction, governance and post-war transition in Gaza. Leaders from about 60 countries have received formal letters inviting them to join.
Key points from the draft charter:
- A $1 billion contribution would secure a permanent seat on the board. Nations that do not pay would still be able to join on a three-year temporary basis.
- The board is chaired by Trump and includes senior political and financial figures from the US and abroad.
- Funding, according to officials familiar with the charter, is supposed to help rebuild Gaza, disarm militant groups, and support a transitional governance setup.
$1 Billion for Peace?
The Trump administration has invited dozens of countries to join what it calls a ‘one-of-a-kind’ peace body. According to officials familiar with the outreach, permanent members would need to contribute $1 billion to secure a lasting seat on the board.
The White House has described the body as a mechanism to guide Gaza’s post-war future. However, the board’s charter reportedly does not directly mention Gaza. That gap has raised eyebrows across capitals.
Several European governments have privately questioned what the money would fund. Others are unsure where the funds would be held or who would oversee spending linked to reconstruction.
Diplomatic Pushback & Uneasy Responses
Despite the high-profile push, many governments are responding cautiously.
Several European countries have expressed concern about the financial demand and the risk that the board might undermine the United Nations’ existing peace efforts. Some diplomats argue the initiative resembles a “Trump-led alternative to the UN” rather than a collaborative peace mechanism.
Mixed reactions from invited nations:
- Hungary and Vietnam have publicly accepted invitations.
- Other nations, including France and Canada, have hesitated or declined to commit to paying large sums.
- India, among others, received an invitation and is considering its position.
Concerns Over Transparency and Mandate
Although the board is pitched as a post-war reconstruction body, the official charter does not explicitly limit its focus to Gaza, prompting questions about how far its reach might extend.
Experts and diplomats worry that:
- The decision-making power concentrated with one leader could skew priorities.
- The lack of a clear mechanism for fund management raises accountability issues.
- It might shift global governance away from established multilateral systems.
The White House has tried to soften critics’ views by saying the reported fee is not a fixed requirement, and that countries will be assessed on their overall “commitment” to peace.
What is Peacekeeping Grift?
Critics argue the proposal blurs the line between diplomacy and political branding. Trump plans to chair the board himself. That decision has intensified scepticism among allies.
European officials worry the initiative concentrates too much authority in one office. Some fear it could sideline existing UN-led frameworks. Others see the buy-in model as setting a dangerous precedent for future peace efforts.
One unnamed US official acknowledged that governments are seeking clarity on safeguards to ensure funds go toward rebuilding Gaza rather than political projects.
Global Reactions and Unlikely Invitees
Invitations have gone out to leaders across regions, including India. The list also includes Russian President Vladimir Putin and Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko. Their inclusion has surprised many diplomats.
Some governments appear open to joining. Others are cautious. Many European capitals remain uncomfortable with the cost and the optics.
Trump’s recent remarks have not helped calm nerves. He has said he no longer feels bound to act “purely of peace” after being overlooked for the Nobel Peace Prize. For critics, that statement underscores their concerns.
Why Davos is on Edge?
Trump wants the board formally launched at Davos, the world’s most high-profile economic gathering. The official forum schedule lists a “Special Address by Donald J. Trump, President of the United States of America” on January 21, 2026. It does not refer to a charter signing the following day.
This last-minute push has unsettled organisers. Davos traditionally focuses on global economic coordination. Trump’s move risks turning the summit into a geopolitical flashpoint.
