Peace Deal Or Billion-Dollar Business? How Trump Is Using Gaza To Cash In And Boost His Legacy

Critics say the Gaza peace board is less about rebuilding lives and more about power, money and political image-making under President Trump.

New Delhi: The US initiative to oversee Gaza’s transition has drawn global attention, inviting countries to take part in what the White House calls a historic peace effort. Experts say the ‘Board of Peace’ is less about peace and more about economic and political influence.

Officially launched by former US President Donald Trump and backed by a November 2025 United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolution, this board was introduced as part of the second phase of a ceasefire plan created to bring an end to the prolonged Israel-Hamas conflict in Gaza. Invitations to be part of this “peace initiative” have already gone out to multiple countries, including India, Pakistan, Egypt, Turkey and even Russia.

On the surface, the initiative seems focussed on rebuilding Gaza, including roads, homes, public services and governance. But the people running it, the high cost to join the board and how decisions are made have caught attention around the world.

A Board Packed With Power Players

Trump, who is known for his global branding and building his legacy, leads the board as its chair. Next to him is his son-in-law Jared Kushner, who has helped frame the US policy in the Middle East. He has earlier publicly spoken about real estate and investment opportunities in Gaza.

Sharing executive space with them are top political and business leaders, including US Secretary of State Marco Rubio Rubio, Steven Charles Witkoff, real-estate developer and US special envoy to the Middle East, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Apollo Global Management CEO Marc Rowan and World Bank President Ajay Banga.

These are not neutral mediators. They are experienced politicians, dealmakers and financiers, each with ties to political power or the global economic system. Their inclusion has stirred skepticism among analysts who question whether a rebuilding initiative should be guided by such a concentrated array of political and business interests rather than inclusive peacebuilding experts.

Critics have pointed out that Palestinians are absent from the top decision-making echelons of the board. Instead, a separate Gaza Executive Board, which is staffed by diplomats and technocrats, is meant to work under the main executive body, creating a layered dynamic of control.

Money For A Seat At The Table

Perhaps the most eye‑catching element of this initiative is the cost of participation. Countries have reportedly been told that a $1 billion contribution is expected to secure a permanent seat on the “Board of Peace”. Smaller investments allow for renewable three‑year membership of the board, but the high price tag has raised eyebrows about whether membership is being sold more like a high‑end club than a diplomatic council.

Financial analysts and foreign policy experts say this setup blurs the lines between peacebuilding and commercial diplomacy, turning influence into a commodity. The requirement of massive financial commitments naturally means that Western nations and wealthy states will dominate decision‑making and profit from reconstruction contracts, they argue.

A Global Stage Or A Legacy Project?

The United States presents the board as a new way to bring stability to Gaza and address global conflicts. Official letters inviting leaders, including Prime Minister Narendra Modi, described it as a “critically historic and magnificent effort” to solidify peace in the Middle East and promote shared prosperity.

But nations are already weighing the optics and the implications of aligning themselves with a US‑led initiative so closely tied to one individual’s leadership brand. As seen in public responses from allied capitals, some countries see opportunity, while others are cautious or critical.

Russia, for instance, has acknowledged receiving an invitation. Moscow said it is reviewing it. The development has surprised many given Moscow’s ongoing geopolitical tensions with the United States.

Why India Has Been Invited

Let’s understand why India received an invitation to join the board. The move, critics argue, is not about framing policy but creating a global image. They say by inviting both India and Pakistan, the two nuclear-armed rivals, Trump aims to project the message that even longstanding adversaries trust his leadership.

He has used similar optics before, claiming mediation between New Delhi and Islamabad, hosting Pakistan’s army to the White House and taking credit for de-escalating military tensions during Operation Sindoor.

Observers say that India understands the limits of this approach that peace cannot be led by a businessman, humanitarian crises cannot be monetised and legitimacy cannot be bought with board seats.

Diplomacy Or Dealmaking?

What is being sold as governance and reconstruction initiative has been described by critics as an economic and political network where peace language overlaps with profit and influence.

Many Gulf states and European powers have not committed to be part of the initiative. Some are assessing whether the board’s mandate goes beyond Gaza under US guidance and potentially aiming at broader global conflict management under a US‑dominated structure.

Observers are concerned that post-war reconstruction is being run by a handful of powerful and financially interested people. They wonder if true stability is possible when authority depends on money and is controlled by a politically led executive.

As invitations continue to go out and countries consider joining the initiative by becoming a member of the board, the world is watching a new kind of peacebuilding. It looks very different from the multilateral diplomacy of recent decades and highlights concerns about power, money and goals in global governance.