Almost everyone appears to have received an invitation to US President Donald Trump’s so-called “Board of Peace”, yet only a small group of states, including Morocco, Albania, Argentina, Hungary, and Vietnam, have agreed to participate.
With entry reportedly costing one billion dollars, and amid widespread suspicion that the initiative is an improvised attempt to marginalise the United Nations, it is hardly surprising that most governments have kept their distance.
The Board of Peace is overseen by a founding executive committee dominated by figures who have denied that genocide has taken place in Gaza. Among them are US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, special envoy Steve Witkoff, Trump’s son in law Jared Kushner, and Wall Street financier Mark Rowan, who played a prominent role in pressuring US universities to suppress pro-Palestinian protests.
What unites this group is not only political alignment but a striking lack of understanding of the Middle East.
The sole figure on the board with any regional experience is former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, if the invasion of Iraq and the collapse that followed can be described as experience. Blair, however, represents only himself. The British government has been careful to publicly distance itself from him.
When Blair’s name surfaced in November, Jonathan Powell, now the UK national security adviser and Blair’s former chief of staff, stated privately that Blair did not represent the British state. According to two informed sources who spoke to Middle East Eye anonymously, Powell actively lobbied against Blair’s appointment.
This position reflects the view within Britain’s institutional establishment, which has shown little patience for Blair’s repeated attempts to reinsert himself into global diplomacy.
Britain’s refusal to endorse Blair
A source familiar with internal discussions at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office confirmed that Blair holds no official standing.
His work through the Tony Blair Institute, the source said, is conducted as a private individual. While informal contacts may exist, Blair does not speak for the British government, and no serious effort has been made to present him as such.
Despite praising Blair as a “great leader” and suggesting he could make a contribution, Prime Minister Keir Starmer has repeatedly avoided endorsing Blair as Britain’s representative on Trump’s board.
The Cabinet Office declined to respond to questions regarding Powell’s stance, while the Foreign Office also refused comment. Starmer later confirmed only that Britain was holding discussions with allies about the Board of Peace.
According to the board’s founding charter, executive members will control specific portfolios, granting them direct authority over Gaza. A secondary body, misleadingly titled the Gaza Executive Board, will hold no such power.
This lower tier includes several founding members alongside Turkish foreign minister Hakan Fidan, Qatari minister Ali Al Thawadi, and Egyptian intelligence chief Major General Hassan Rashad. While these figures understand Gaza well, their inclusion appears largely symbolic.
A White House statement said their role would be to support governance and service delivery to promote peace and stability. The language is vague enough to be effectively meaningless.
Saudi Arabia’s decision to remain outside this framework is notable, and prudent.
A deeply troubling structure
Nikolai Mladenov, a Bulgarian diplomat, has been appointed as Gaza’s “high representative”, a role comparable to a foreign minister. Supporting him is a group of advisers with deeply controversial records.
Among them is businessman and rabbi Aryeh Lightstone, a staunch defender of Israeli settlers who was closely involved in establishing the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. At its aid distribution sites, more than two thousand Palestinians were killed by live fire.
At the lowest level sits the technocratic body intended to administer Gaza. Only two names proposed by Palestinian factions were accepted. The most controversial appointment is the head of security.
Sami Nasman, a retired Palestinian Authority security officer, was sentenced in absentia by a Gaza court to fifteen years in prison for inciting chaos and allegedly coordinating assassination attempts against Hamas leaders. He has lived in exile since and is unlikely to return.
With such figures shaping Gaza’s future, the risks are obvious.
Witkoff announced the second phase of the ceasefire in the same manner as the first, placing all responsibility on Hamas. He described the phase as requiring the full demilitarisation of Gaza and warned of severe consequences if Hamas failed to comply.
He made no mention of Israel’s obligation to withdraw from the so called yellow line, despite Israeli forces now occupying more than sixty percent of Gaza. Nor did he acknowledge over a thousand ceasefire violations or the killing of hundreds of Palestinians since the agreement was signed.
Blair’s remarks echoed this narrative. He described Trump’s twenty point plan as a historic achievement and declared the war over.
For Gaza, still enduring air strikes, floods, harsh winter conditions, and the destruction of more than one hundred thousand tents, this assertion bears no resemblance to reality. Israel continues to block food and reconstruction aid and refuses to allow two way movement at the Rafah crossing. As a result, the new Gaza administration committee is reportedly forced to meet in Cairo rather than Gaza.
An alternate reality
Israel has repeatedly violated the ceasefire, yet Blair operates within a political universe where genocide did not occur and resistance must disarm while occupation remains intact.
Ironically, Blair’s former negotiator Jonathan Powell would never have secured an end to armed struggle in Northern Ireland without power sharing. Today, Blair applies an entirely different standard to Palestinians.
In his statements, Blair avoids even mentioning Palestinians or Palestine.
Powell’s decision to distance himself from this initiative is therefore justified. In reality, the status quo is likely to persist. Gaza will remain besieged, Israeli forces will retain control of large areas, and international forces will not intervene. More than two million Palestinians will continue living in tents.
Expecting the same political actors who enabled Gaza’s collapse to now resolve the crisis is not merely delusional, but criminal.
Inviting those responsible for Gaza’s destruction to negotiate peace is akin to asking the architects of ethnic cleansing in Bosnia to broker the Dayton Agreement.
Blair helped engineer the international conditions that excluded Hamas from negotiations after it won Palestine’s only election in 2006. That exclusion formed the basis of the siege that continues today.
He later held talks with Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal, quietly acknowledging the failure of his own policy. Yet each subsequent intervention by Blair has only provided further political cover for Israel’s siege.
There is no indication he will act differently now.
Trump as a mafia patron
As for Trump, he makes no effort to conceal his indifference to Palestinian lives, justice, or human rights. His priority is expanding personal influence and extracting financial gain.
By assembling his own circle of loyal operatives under the label of a Board of Peace, Trump is attempting to manage global affairs the same way he manages domestic power. He does not rule like a fascist ideologue, but like a mafia boss, demanding loyalty and payment.
Such tactics may intimidate some governments, but they are unlikely to break a people who have endured colonisation, exile, military rule, walls, siege, and genocide while preserving their national identity.
The Palestinian cause today resonates more deeply than ever among Palestinians themselves.
Long before Trump fades from relevance, his Board of Peace will be discarded into the political dustbin of history.
