The Trump administration is undertaking a broad diplomatic push to assemble the ‘Board of Peace,’ the body intended to steer Gaza’s post war governance and reconstruction. Invitations have reportedly been extended to leaders of nearly 60 countries including Türkiye, Egypt, India, the UK, Canada, Australia, Brazil, and Jordan reflecting an effort to lend the Gaza plan wide international legitimacy. On X, US Ambassador to India Sergio Gor shared President Trump’s letter inviting Prime Minister Narendra Modi to join the board, underscoring Washington’s bid to draw major global partners into the initiative.
Last week, the US administration unveiled the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), a new and key pillar of Trump’s evolving Gaza Peace Plan, tasked with overseeing postwar reconstruction, institutional rebuilding, and day to day governance, under international oversight. The White House statement announced, “The National Committee for the Administration of Gaza will be led by Dr Ali Sharath, a widely respected technocratic leader who will oversee the restoration of core public services, the rebuilding of civil institutions, and the stabilisation of daily life in Gaza.”
Linked to both Trump’s Board of Peace and UN Security Council Resolution 2803, the committee reflects Washington’s attempt to integrate security, reconstruction, and political administration into a single coordinated framework.
The executive board surrounding the NCAG includes US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, US Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff, businessman Jared Kushner, former British Prime Minister Sir Tony Blair, billionaire Mark Rowan, President of the World Bank Ajay Banga, Bulgarian diplomat Nickolay Mladenov, UN humanitarian coordinator for Gaza Sigrid Kaag, Turkish foreign minister Hakan Fidan, Qatari diplomat Ali Al-Thawadi, director of Egypt's intelligence agency General Hassan Rashad, Emirati Minister Reem Al-Hashimy and Israeli billionaire Yakir Gabay. The inclusion of Hakan Fidan and Ali Al Thawadi is likely to draw scrutiny given long-standing Israeli criticism of both countries, despite their behind the scenes role in securing a US-brokered truce with Hamas.
Security responsibilities will fall to Major General Jasper Jeffers, appointed to lead the International Stabilization Force, charged with demilitarisation efforts and ensuring safe delivery of humanitarian and reconstruction materials. The White House has indicated that additional members will be named in the coming weeks.
Earlier, on November 17, 2025, the UN Security Council had adopted a resolution endorsing the Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict of September 29 and welcoming the Trump Declaration for Enduring Peace and Prosperity issued on 13 October. The measure, passed with 13 votes in favour, acknowledged the roles of the United States, Qatar, Egypt, and Türkiye in facilitating the Gaza ceasefire. It was not unanimous: the UK and France abstained, while Russia and China declined to support the text. Moscow argued the resolution did not sufficiently affirm Palestinian statehood, and both Russia and China suggested the language leaned too heavily toward the positions of Israel and the US.
Following the vote, President Trump characteristically claimed the moment as a personal triumph celebrating the outcome as validation of the peace framework he had championed. On social media, he declared that the decision “will go down as one of the biggest UN leads to further peace and is a moment of true historic proportion.”
The inclusion of several figures who are not widely regarded as neutral on Israel–Palestine in the Board of Peace has drawn intense scrutiny. Trump's son in law Jared Kushner, for example, has previously made remarks suggesting the displacement of Palestinians in the name of development, while Senator Marco Rubio has consistently opposed a two state solution and supported Israeli settlement expansion. President Trump himself has often used Palestinian identity as a political cudgel. With no Palestinians included on the committee, nor any transfer of authority to the Palestinian Authority, which is recognised by more than 150 states, many Palestinians across the political spectrum are likely to view the structure as a form of neo-colonial oversight.
The absence of meaningful Arab representation, combined with the prominence of figures perceived as hostile to even modest Palestinian aspirations, risks reinforcing Hamas’s narrative that the international system is fundamentally aligned against Palestinians and that extremism is the only viable response. There are, however, potential short term benefits: if a technocratic authority can be established and Hamas is removed from day to day governance in Gaza, that would mark a significant shift, and any mechanism that curbs Israeli violations of the ceasefire would be welcomed by many.
Interestingly, though membership to the Board will be available at a premium with the Trump administration asking participating nations to contribute at least $1 billion to secure permanent membership.
These developments unfold against a backdrop of renewed violence, with Israel and Hamas accusing each other of violating the ceasefire and reports of more than 450 Palestinians including over 100 children and three Israeli soldiers killed during the truce. Hamas has previously refused to give up its weapons without a creation of an independent Palestinian state, while Israel has not committed to a full withdrawal from Gaza. Already, the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is criticising the makeup of a Palestinian-led organisation that will take over the governance of Gaza that this peace board will oversee.
Trump’s intensified focus on Gaza coincides with a noticeable recalibration of his broader Middle East posture. After hinting at possible military action against Iran earlier in the month, the president has shifted to a more restrained tone, citing reports of a temporary halt to executions in Iran and telling reporters, “I greatly respect the fact that they cancelled that.”
Finally, it is difficult to say how independent any Palestinian technocratic committee can truly be. Trump’s record offers little indication of support for meaningful Palestinian self governance. That said, if the individuals selected to the committee are genuinely committed to reconstruction and to rebuilding Gaza in ways that reflect the needs of its population rather than enabling what critics describe as “disaster capitalism,” where political allies profit from the crisis, the effort could still produce tangible improvements.
For many Palestinians, the bar is understandably low. After decades of blockade, misrule, and repression under Hamas, followed by the devastation of the recent war, even incremental steps toward normalcy would be welcomed. A technocratic authority focused on restoring services, rebuilding infrastructure, and easing daily hardship could offer a rare sense of forward movement. Whether such progress can be insulated from political interference, however, remains an open question.