Current Affairs

Board of Peace: Framework for Gaza’s Reconstruction and Governance

Author: VisionIAS Editorial Team

Jan 19, 2026Current Affairs9 min read

Board of Peace: Framework for Gaza’s Reconstruction and Governance

US President Trump hailed the new Gaza administration (NCAG), advancing Phase Two of his 20-point peace roadmap.

The establishment of the Board of Peace in January 2026 represents a significant development in international conflict resolution. Emerging from the prolonged Gaza conflict that intensified after October 7, 2023, this United States-led initiative marks a transition from traditional multilateral diplomacy toward a more streamlined governance model.

Endorsed by UN Security Council Resolution 2803 in November 2025, the Board of Peace aims to transition the Gaza Strip from a conflict zone into a demilitarized and economically stable territory. This initiative has generated considerable global debate about the future of international governance, the role of the United Nations, and the prospects for lasting peace between Israel Hamas factions.

Table of Contents

Comprehensive Gaza Peace Plan

The Board of Peace originated from the Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict, a 20-point roadmap unveiled by US President Donald J. Trump in September 2025. Unlike previous frameworks such as the Oslo Accords that prioritized political negotiations, the Gaza peace plan emphasizes security demilitarization alongside substantial infrastructure investment.

The plan’s acceptance by both Israel and Hamas on October 9, 2025, initiated Phase One, characterized by hostage exchanges and ceasefire maintenance. This fragile peace required a robust enforcement mechanism for Phase Two, leading to the creation of the Board of Peace as the guarantor of implementation.

Key pillars of the plan include:

Designation of Gaza as a terror-free zone necessitating the dismantling of Hamas military infrastructure.
Commitment to redevelop Gaza for its residents.
Immediate cessation of hostilities along with provisions for the return of hostages and release of prisoners.
Establishment of technocratic governance via an apolitical Palestinian committee under the oversight of the Board of Peace.
Creation of a Special Economic Zone with preferred tariffs to encourage international investment.

The plan’s scope, estimated at $67 billion in reconstruction costs, represents an attempt to address a long-standing conflict through reconstruction and economic development.

Institutional Structure: A Three-Tiered Governance Model

The Board of Peace operates through a hierarchical structure designed for efficient decision-making.

At the top sits the Board itself, chaired by President Trump. The Board utilizes a financing model where permanent membership requires $1 billion contributions to the reconstruction fund. This mechanism ensures participation by countries with substantial financial commitment to the rebuilding effort.

The Executive Board is tasked with operationalizing the vision. Members include US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, real estate developer Steve Witkoff, former Senior Advisor Jared Kushner, former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, Apollo Global Management CEO Marc Rowan, and World Bank President Ajay Banga. Each oversees specific portfolios including governance capacity-building, reconstruction, investment attraction, and capital mobilization.

The Gaza Executive Board serves as the regional interface and includes pragmatic mediators like Turkey’s Foreign Minister and Qatar’s Ali Al-Thawadi, who maintain communication channels with Hamas. Egypt’s Intelligence Chief and UAE’s Reem Al-Hashimy provide security coordination and financial support. Nickolay Mladenov serves as High Representative, bridging the Board of Peace and Palestinian administration.

Palestinian Administration: The NCAG

The National Committee for the Administration of Gaza, launched on January 16, 2026, functions as the local government. Led by Dr. Ali Sha’ath, a civil engineer and former Palestinian Authority Deputy Minister, the NCAG represents the technocratic face of Palestinian governance.

The committee comprises 15 members selected for their expertise, overseeing portfolios including interior and security, finance, health, housing, education, and justice. Major General Sami Nasman handles the security portfolio, tasked with vetting police and enforcing internal order. Bashir Al-Rayyes manages the budget and World Bank fund disbursements.

The NCAG operates under certain constraints. Israel has restricted participation of anyone on PA or Hamas payroll, which limits the available pool of experienced civil servants. The committee derives its authority from the Board of Peace rather than through electoral processes.

Security Framework: The International Stabilization Force

The International Stabilization Force, authorized by UN Security Council Resolution 2803, is designed to fill security gaps. Commanded by Major General Jasper Jeffers, former US Special Operations Commander, the ISF represents an active stabilization force.

The ISF’s primary mission includes supporting comprehensive demilitarization, securing borders against smuggling, and training new Palestinian police forces. The force may establish secure zones where aid and reconstruction can proceed, gradually expanding stable areas.

Global Reactions: Diverse Perspectives

The Board of Peace has generated varied international responses.

Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu supports the removal of Hamas but has expressed concerns about certain aspects of the implementation, particularly regarding the involvement of Turkey and Qatar in the governance structure.

Egypt views the Board of Peace as an important mechanism for addressing the humanitarian crisis on its border. Jordan is reviewing its participation carefully. Saudi Arabia has welcomed Phase Two but is observing whether genuine pathways to the two state solution emerge before committing substantial financial resources.

India has received an invitation to join but has not yet formally responded. While welcoming the Gaza peace plan’s first phase, particularly hostage releases and humanitarian assistance, India has ruled out military participation in the ISF as it is not a UN peacekeeping mission. India maintains its commitment to the two state solution as the pathway to resolve the Israel Hamas conflict while balancing its relationship with the United States and its commitment to multilateral principles.

Relationship with the UN System

The Board of Peace operates under UN Security Council Resolution 2803, which passed with 13 votes in favor while Russia and China abstained. The resolution formally endorsed the Comprehensive Plan and authorized the Board and International Stabilization Force until December 31, 2027.

This creates a paradoxical relationship with the UN system, technically authorized by the Security Council yet fundamentally departing from UN principles. The Board’s financing model, granting permanent membership based on financial contribution, contradicts the UN Charter’s sovereign equality principle where each member state holds equal voting power regardless of wealth.

The abstentions by Russia and China signal concerns about creating parallel mechanisms that bypass traditional multilateral consensus, even though these mechanisms could be successful in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict—a challenge that has defied UN efforts for decades. The Board could establish a precedent for future “minilateral” interventions in select conflicts, potentially creating a two-tier system: well-resourced governance for strategically significant crises and traditional UN mechanisms for others.

The Board also risks overlapping with established UN agencies like UNRWA and UNDP, raising questions about coordination versus duplication. Ultimately, whether it complements or undermines the UN depends on whether it demonstrates pragmatic innovation or sets troubling precedents for fragmenting universal international institutions.

Conclusion

The Board of Peace represents a new approach to managing the Gaza conflict through a combination of international oversight, technocratic governance, and substantial economic investment. While operating under UN Security Council Resolution 2803, it introduces governance mechanisms that differ from traditional UN structures.

The initiative’s success will be measured by its ability to deliver practical improvements in Gaza while preserving pathways to the two state solution and meaningful Palestinian self-determination. As implementation continues, the international community watches to see whether this approach can achieve stability and reconstruction where previous efforts have struggled.