Trump's Board of Peace meets in Washington as president gears up for war

Editor's note: William Jones, a special commentator for CGTN, is a former Washington bureau chief for Executive Intelligence Review News Service and a non-resident fellow of the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

The ironies of the situation couldn't be greater. A president of the United States who more than anything would want to win the Noble Prize as a "peacemaker" gathered the leaders of over 20 nations in Washington on February 19 to celebrate his "peacemaking" as  the last element of a major military armada, the USS Gerald R. Ford, the country's largest aircraft carrier, makes its way to the Middle East for a possible strike against the nation of Iran. One doesn't know whether to laugh, or to cry. Even during the ceremony, Trump was indicating that he would be willing to strike Iran within days if they don't meet his demands at the negotiating table.

The "Board" itself is something of a conundrum. It came about as the result of a US-backed resolution in the United Nations in November, in which the US called for such a board, led by the US President, allegedly to bring together the funds needed for the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip, devastated by the years-long bombing by the state of Israel. The establishment of such a board was approved by the United Nations by UN Resolution 2803 as a temporary measure until the Gaza territory could be turned over to a Palestinian authority.

While invitations to join the Board were sent out to many countries by the US, not everyone was eager to join such a sketchy venture. Both Russia and China declined to accept the invitation, as did most of the European nations. Many countries have joined, however, either because of their genuine concern for the fate of the Palestinian people, or for the purpose of appeasing a rather mercurial US president, who never forgets a snub. Sadly and strangely, no Palestinian representatives have been invited to join.

Given the pretensions of the US President as "The Peacemaker," however, Trump has indicated that his role as chairman of the "Board," means that he has effective veto power over the work of the Board. He even mooted the possibility that he might continue in that role even after he leaves the presidency, giving him the ability to effect foreign policy even without presidential powers.

Given President Trump's "discontent" with the role of the United Nations, it has also been feared that Trump's board, which in the UN Resolution has been restricted to the situation in Gaza, would be expanded to other crisis areas, functioning somewhat as an alternative power to the UN, but involving only "select" countries, who have kowtowed to the wishes of Trump. At the first "board meeting" on February 19, Trump tried to assuage these fears, paying homage to the central role of the UN in peacemaking, but portraying the Board as a monitor of the UN operations in order to assure that it was operating effectively. The only monitor of the UN, however, should be the member countries of the United Nations themselves and not some private assemblage of nations run by Trump Incorporated.

Aside from the still unanswered question of ultimate control over the Gaza Strip, there is the question of how the money collected by the Board will be spent. One chief reason for having such a board was the possibility of board member countries contributing to Gaza reconstruction. To become a permanent member requires a contribution of $1 billion. The size of the sum eliminates a good portion of the countries eligible, as not every nation can contribute such a sum without considerable hardship on their people.

As yet, however, there is no indication on what projects the money will be spent. The only project bandied about at the moment is a 5,000-person military base to be built in the south of Gaza. This is to house an International Stabilization Force that can keep the peace in Gaza. Is this to be paid for with the funds devoted to Gaza reconstruction, or perhaps, counted in the $10 billion promised to the fund by Trump? What troops would be serving there?  This issue also remains unclear.

And the major unanswered political question remains: Will Gaza be returned to Palestinian control under the UN-mandated two-state solution, a solution to which President Trump has never firmly given his support? Without this key question answered, any "peacemaking" in the Middle East becomes a real fiction in the mind of the President. More significantly, if US bombs begin to fall on Iran after the next ten days that President Trump has given Iran to accept his conditions – or even sooner – the leaders who marched in lockstep to Washington for the Board of Peace announcement will no doubt rue the day that they jumped so quickly on board what well may be a sinking ship.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on X, formerly Twitter, to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)