Cairo (ANTARA) - The US-led \u201cBoard of Peace\u201d, proposed as a mechanism\nfor overseeing post-war governance in the Gaza Strip, has raised\nconcerns among regional analysts regarding its structure, mandate and\ncapacity to effectively champion Palestinian rights.<\/p>\n
Whilst every genuine effort to resolve the Gaza conflict deserves\nappreciation, experts worry the board could become a \u201cone-man show\u201d that\ndisregards international law, sidelines Palestinian rights and risks\nwidening global divisions rather than delivering a just resolution.<\/p>\n
\u201cOne-man show\u201d<\/p>\n
The board, which reportedly offers a lifetime leadership position to\nUS President Donald Trump, has been described by experts as a\npersonalised instrument rather than a legitimate international mechanism\ncapable of addressing complex political conflicts.<\/p>\n
Analysts argue the initiative is likely designed to reflect\nWashington\u2019s own strategic priorities, using Gaza to advance broader\ngeopolitical, economic and even domestic political interests, rather\nthan serving as a neutral conflict resolution vehicle.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe board is tied to an individual rather than to the international\nsystem,\u201d said Maged Botros, a professor of political science at Helwan\nUniversity in Egypt, adding that this means the board\u2019s continuity\ndepends on a single person rather than an institutional framework.<\/p>\n
Trump officially launched the \u201cBoard of Peace\u201d on 22 January during a\ncharter-signing ceremony at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos,\nSwitzerland. The move has raised concerns that the board could undermine\nUN authority and damage the existing multilateral peacekeeping\nframework. Several major global powers and traditional US allies have\nalso opted not to join the board.<\/p>\n
\u201cPolitically, this is a one-man show,\u201d Botros said.<\/p>\n
Similarly, Tarek Fahmy, a professor of political science at Cairo\nUniversity in Egypt, described the board as \u201cTrump\u2019s board, not a peace\nboard in the global sense,\u201d warning that it lacks institutional\nlegitimacy and is not binding on future US administrations.<\/p>\n
Both experts emphasised that such a board cannot replace the UN, \u201can\ninternational organisation founded on a comprehensive charter and\ncollective legitimacy\u201d.<\/p>\n
Palestinian rights overlooked<\/p>\n
Another concern raised by analysts is that the board fails to include\nPalestinian rights or political representation, raising fears that\nreconstruction efforts could proceed without addressing the core\npolitical issues of the conflict.<\/p>\n
Botros stressed that Palestinian rights are rooted in international\nlaw, a foundation that the board disregards in favour of \u201cpersonal\ninitiatives and unpredictable decisions made by a single\nindividual\u201d.<\/p>\n
This approach means the outcomes achieved will most likely reflect\n\u201cpersonal beliefs and the balance of power\u201d rather than the fulfilment\nof legal rights, he warned.<\/p>\n
Fahmy also highlighted that the absence of Palestinian representation\non the board fuels scepticism and undermines the initiative\u2019s\ncredibility from the outset.<\/p>\n
Botros noted that Trump\u2019s approach tends to be driven by power\nconsiderations rather than legal or moral aspects, arguing that\ndecisions under the US-led board would most likely align with Israeli\ninterests, reflecting Washington\u2019s strategic calculations.<\/p>\n
Fahmy agreed with that assessment but warned the board could actually\ndeepen regional divisions, potentially destabilising the regional order\nrather than achieving peace.<\/p>\n
\u201cDividing the world on the principle of \u2018those who are not with us\nare against us\u2019 will shake global stability, not bring peace,\u201d he\nstressed.<\/p>\n
Both experts agreed that the board\u2019s effectiveness is further clouded\nby potential political and financial obstacles within the US, including\npossible opposition from Congress.<\/p>\n
Fahmy stated that the board\u2019s role remains unclear, highlighting\ncontradictions between the peace rhetoric of US officials and their\nprovocative actions, which could turn the board into \u201ca merely symbolic\nbody rather than one with real influence\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cIf we ask directly whether this will resolve the Gaza conflict in a\nmanner consistent with Palestinian rights, the answer is no,\u201d Botros\nsaid.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/us-led-peace-board-raises-concerns-over-gaza-and-palestinian-solutions-1771726626", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }