Global attention has once again shifted to the Middle East after former US President Donald Trump extended an invitation to India to join a newly proposed Gaza “Board of Peace.” The initiative comes at a time when the war-ravaged Palestinian territory faces immense challenges related to governance, reconstruction, humanitarian recovery, and long-term political stability.
The announcement has sparked wide diplomatic discussion, with India emerging as a key name due to its balanced relationships across the region. As international reactions remain cautious, the proposed board is being viewed not only as a mechanism for Gaza’s future but also as a potential new model for global conflict resolution.
The move underlines the growing expectation that emerging powers like India may play a larger role in shaping post-conflict governance frameworks, especially in regions where trust deficits and geopolitical rivalries have long obstructed peace efforts.
Trump Invites India To Join Gaza Board Of Peace
US President Donald Trump formally invited India to be part of what he described as a “Board of Peace” aimed at overseeing governance and reconstruction in postwar Gaza. The invitation was extended as part of a broader peace proposal designed to bring structure and international oversight to the territory following months of destruction and instability.
According to officials, the board is intended to coordinate political administration, humanitarian rebuilding, and institutional reform in Gaza. Trump’s proposal reflects his long-standing approach of pursuing unconventional diplomatic frameworks outside traditional multilateral institutions.
India’s inclusion is being seen as significant, as it represents recognition of New Delhi’s diplomatic credibility and its ability to maintain dialogue with multiple sides in long-running conflicts.
Structure Of The Proposed Board
The White House stated that the governance framework would consist of multiple layers. At the top would be a main board chaired by Donald Trump himself, signaling direct political oversight and leadership from the highest level.
Alongside this would be a Palestinian committee of technocrats tasked with managing day-to-day governance of Gaza. This group is envisioned as a non-political administrative body focused on restoring civil services, rebuilding institutions, and stabilizing public life.
A second executive board would function in an advisory capacity, offering strategic input, regional coordination, and international expertise to support the broader mission.
Why India Is Considered Acceptable To All Sides
India’s potential role stands out because of its historical ties with both Israel and Palestine. Over decades, India has maintained a careful diplomatic balance, supporting the Palestinian cause while simultaneously developing a strong strategic partnership with Israel.
This dual engagement has positioned India as one of the few major countries viewed as relatively neutral and trustworthy by both parties. Indian officials have consistently emphasized dialogue, humanitarian assistance, and peaceful coexistence.
Such diplomatic equilibrium is rare in Middle Eastern geopolitics, making India a natural candidate for involvement in sensitive post-conflict processes.
India’s Humanitarian Role In Gaza
India was among the earliest countries to send humanitarian aid to Gaza following the outbreak of the recent conflict. Supplies were delivered through Egypt and included essential medicines, relief materials, and emergency support.
This assistance reinforced India’s image as a responsible global actor focused on humanitarian principles rather than political alignment alone. The aid efforts were widely noted by international observers and regional stakeholders.
India’s continued emphasis on civilian welfare has strengthened its standing as a country capable of contributing constructively to Gaza’s recovery phase.
Pakistan Also Receives Invitation
Pakistan confirmed that it too received an invitation from Donald Trump to join the Gaza Board of Peace. However, its potential participation has already triggered debate due to regional sensitivities and differing international perceptions.
Israel’s envoy to India previously indicated that Pakistan would be unacceptable to Israel for any future role in Gaza’s governance. This stance reflects long-standing distrust and political differences between Israel and Pakistan.
As a result, India’s position appears comparatively stronger, with fewer objections from key stakeholders involved in Gaza’s future.
Global Reactions Remain Cautious
Governments across the world responded cautiously to Trump’s initiative. While invitations were reportedly sent to nearly 60 nations, few countries offered immediate public endorsements.
Diplomats expressed concerns privately that the proposed mechanism could overlap with or weaken the role of established international institutions, particularly the United Nations.
Many governments chose silence, preferring internal evaluation before committing to a framework whose authority, mandate, and long-term structure remain unclear.
Concerns Over Impact On United Nations
A major point of unease among diplomats is the possible duplication of responsibilities traditionally handled by the United Nations. Critics fear that parallel structures could undermine existing peacekeeping and mediation mechanisms.
Some officials warned that introducing alternative global conflict-resolution bodies could fragment international consensus and complicate already fragile diplomatic processes.
These concerns have contributed to the restrained response from European and Middle Eastern capitals.
Hungary Offers Immediate Support
Among all the countries invited, Hungary emerged as the only nation to offer unequivocal acceptance of Trump’s proposal. The country’s leadership maintains close political ties with Trump, which may explain the swift endorsement.
Hungary’s support, however, has not yet translated into broader international momentum for the initiative.
Most other governments appear to be waiting for clearer details regarding responsibilities, authority, and legal legitimacy.
Composition Of The Gaza Executive Board
The separate 11-member Gaza Executive Board is expected to include several prominent international figures. These include Turkey’s Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, the UN Middle East peace coordinator Sigrid Kaag, and UAE Minister of International Cooperation Reem Al-Hashimy.
Other proposed members reportedly include officials from Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, along with Israeli-Cypriot billionaire Yakir Gabay.
This diverse composition is intended to combine diplomatic, humanitarian, and economic expertise to guide Gaza’s reconstruction.
Israeli Government Raises Objections
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office stated that the composition of the executive board had not been coordinated with Israel. The government expressed concern that the structure contradicted its official policy.
Particular objections were reportedly linked to Turkey’s involvement, as Israel has voiced strong opposition to Ankara’s regional role. Israel also maintains a tense relationship with Qatar.
These objections highlight the diplomatic complexities that the Board of Peace may face even before implementation begins.
Board Formed Under Trump’s 20-Point Peace Plan
The Board of Peace was formed on January 15 as part of Trump’s broader 20-point peace plan for Gaza. The plan outlines political restructuring, international oversight, economic rebuilding, and long-term security arrangements.
Supporters argue that the initiative could provide fresh momentum where traditional negotiations have stalled repeatedly.
Critics, however, question whether such a plan can succeed without consensus from all major regional stakeholders.
Potential Model For Future Global Conflicts
Beyond Gaza, the Board of Peace is being presented as a potential model for addressing other global conflicts in the future. Trump has suggested that similar structures could be applied to crisis zones elsewhere.
This idea represents a shift toward ad-hoc international coalitions rather than permanent multilateral institutions.
Whether such a model can gain legitimacy and durability remains an open question in global diplomacy.
India’s Strategic Dilemma
For India, the invitation presents both opportunity and challenge. Participation could elevate India’s global diplomatic profile and reinforce its image as a responsible power committed to peace.
At the same time, involvement in Gaza carries political sensitivities, regional risks, and complex geopolitical implications.
New Delhi is therefore expected to weigh its decision carefully, balancing humanitarian principles with strategic interests.
What Lies Ahead
The White House has stated that additional members of the Board of Peace will be announced in the coming weeks. Clear definitions of authority, funding mechanisms, and coordination with existing institutions are still awaited.
As discussions continue, the proposal has already succeeded in reigniting debate over how postwar Gaza should be governed and rebuilt.
The coming days will determine whether the Board of Peace evolves into a meaningful international platform or remains a controversial diplomatic experiment.
Also Read: iPhone Fold Specs Leaked Analyst Reveals Key Details
