On January 16 the Trump administration unveiled a new body to oversee Gaza’s reconstruction and governance. The so‑called “Board of Peace,” Trump promised, would guide a technocratic committee through the next phase of the faux-ceasefire and help rebuild a territory devastated by nearly two years of war. The board’s founding members include former British prime minister Tony Blair, Trump’s son‑in‑law Jared Kushner, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and real‑estate developer‑turned‑special envoy Steve Witkoff; private‑equity executive Marc Rowan, World Bank president Ajay Banga and US deputy national security adviser Robert Gabriel round out the list. These appointees are tasked with overseeing governance capacity‑building, regional relations, reconstruction and large‑scale funding. Bulgarian diplomat Nickolay Mladenov, a former UN official, will serve as the high representative for Gaza.
Supporters describe the arrangement as a pragmatic interim solution. Critics see something far more sinister. Experts contend that the plan resembles a colonial administration, likening it to “imperialism masquerading as a peace process,” and noting that it is “regrettably reminiscent of colonial practices”. Overseeing an occupied territory through an international board chaired by the very power that funds the war, with no meaningful Palestinian representation, sounds less like self‑determination than viceroyalty.
What makes the Board of Peace truly alarming is not only its structure but its personnel. Most of the appointees have records that make a mockery of impartiality and peace. They represent governments and industries that have bankrolled and executed wars across the Middle East. Gazans, rights advocates, and international analysts have asked why those responsible for devastation should supervise reconstruction. A closer look at each member clarifies their conflicts of interest.
Tony Blair: The Iraq war’s evangelist
Tony Blair, Britain’s prime minister during the 2003 invasion of Iraq, is widely condemned for his role. He is considered a “war criminal” in much of the Arab world. Many Palestinians regard his inclusion as “ridiculous” and “too toxic,” while one British lawmaker called it “outrageous”. Blair’s tenure as the Quartet’s Middle East envoy produced little progress and he is seen as biased toward Israel. Gazans view his appointment – by the country that invaded Iraq – as an insult.
Blair’s unsuitability runs deeper than personal reputation. In early 2025 he joined Israeli and American strategists in developing the war plan for Gaza and was touted as a potential “governor‑general” of the territory. Trump himself mused about ethnic cleansing and a glitzy “Gaza Riviera,” an idea Blair did not publicly reject. At the same time, Israel was flattening Gaza City and starving its residents. Far from acting as a neutral mediator, Blair has long aligned himself with the war on terror, promoting policies that entrench occupation and ignore Palestinian rights.
Jared Kushner: nepotism and real‑estate fantasies
Jared Kushner’s 2019 “Deal of the Century” was widely boycotted and dismissed by Palestinians as a $50 billion bribe because it ignored the occupation and offered inducements to bury refugees’ rights. Although the plan touted huge investment figures, most of the money would have gone to regional governments and private investors, with the Palestinian share arriving as loans and conditional on surrendering claims to return to their homes. Recognizing this, Palestinian leaders boycotted the Manama workshop designed to promote the deal. Kushner’s close relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his role in moving the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem underscored the plan’s pro‑Israel bias.
Kushner’s subsequent comments reveal a mindset that treats Gaza as a real‑estate opportunity. In a Harvard interview he said the enclave’s waterfront property could be “very valuable” if residents were moved out so Israel could “clean it up,” lamenting that money had gone into tunnels and munitions instead of “education and innovation”. He suggested temporarily relocating Palestinians to the Negev desert while bulldozing Gaza, promising that they could move back later.
Marco Rubio: hawk as diplomat
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has consistently echoed Israel’s war aims. During a 2025 visit to Jerusalem he vowed to destroy Hamas and refused to discuss a ceasefire. He warned allies that recognizing a Palestinian state would make peace less likely and insists Gaza has no future until Hamas is eliminated. Such hawkish rhetoric mirrors Israel’s agenda rather than that of an impartial diplomat.
Rubio’s wider worldview is equally belligerent. He argues that violence in the region stems from Iran’s ambitions, advocates “maximum pressure” sanctions and rejects re‑entry into the nuclear deal. He labels Hezbollah a “full‑blown agent of Iran,” calls wiping out its leadership and the neighborhoods around it a “service to humanity,” and champions regime change. His bellicosity is matched by his donors: he has taken over $1 million from pro‑Israel groups and hundreds of thousands from the US weapons industry. Little wonder he sees war, rather than diplomacy, as the solution.
Steve Witkoff: real‑estate mogul and ethics train wreck
Steve Witkoff is a luxury real‑estate developer with no diplomatic experience. He and Trump secured a $2 billion investment from Abu Dhabi for their private cryptocurrency venture, a deal that has raised red flags among ethics officials because federal officers may not accept payments from foreign governments. Witkoff still holds a stake in the firm and has yet to divest fully; former ethics advisers note that reaping profits from an official post appears to violate both the Emoluments Clause and Office of Government Ethics regulations. None of this has stopped him from acting as a peace envoy, underscoring how the board rewards business ties and loyalty rather than impartiality or expertise.
His foray into diplomacy has been equally troubled. In Gaza, he misjudged Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and failed to extend or renew a ceasefire. In Ukraine and Iran he offered concessions to Russia and Tehran only to walk them back amid criticism, showing a lack of grasp over complex regional dynamics. He has acknowledged that he entered the role naive and has been “boning up” on diplomacy by reading books and watching documentaries. Entrusting Gaza’s reconstruction to a developer still learning on the job illustrates the board’s priorities: personal connections and profit trump the qualifications needed to secure a just and lasting peace.
Marc Rowan: billionaire activist for Israel
Marc Rowan, CEO of Apollo Global Management, is an outspoken pro‑Israel donor who has mobilized his vast fortune to punish institutions that do not toe his line on Israel. When the University of Pennsylvania hosted a Palestinian literary festival, he spearheaded an alumni revolt, urging wealthy donors to withdraw support and send only token contributions to the school. Other billionaires followed his lead. Rowan linked the festival’s authors to ethnic cleansing but offered no evidence; the student newspaper could not corroborate his claims. This campaign undermined academic freedom and mirrored the very boycott tactics he decries.
His entanglements extend well beyond campus politics. Rowan became a major Trump donor after Apollo lent $184 million to the Kushner family’s real‑estate business. He privately asked federal officials to relax collateral requirements on junk bonds at the height of the pandemic to protect his investments. At the same time he poured money into politicians who advocate austerity and deregulation. His behavior reveals a pattern: using political influence to protect his balance sheet while squeezing institutions that challenge pro‑Israel orthodoxy. Placing such a figure on a peace board suggests that financial interests and ideological conformity matter more than Gaza’s welfare.
Ajay Banga: privatizing reconstruction
Ajay Banga’s nomination to lead the World Bank drew criticism from civil society groups, who argue that his corporate pedigree at Mastercard, Citigroup, PepsiCo, and Nestlé signifies a bias toward private‑sector solutions. At Mastercard he championed predatory financing schemes; in South Africa, a government social‑grant distribution project partnered with Net1 led to beneficiaries being saddled with exploitative fees and irregular lending practices. Rather than acknowledge harm, Banga has doubled down on leveraging private capital, arguing that there is not enough money for development without mobilizing investors.
Critics note that the same “gentleman’s agreement” that guaranteed an American at the helm of the World Bank installed Banga with little transparency. Jeff Hauser observes that the corporations he has led exacerbate inequality and do not promote shared prosperity. His plan to attract five dollars of private investment for every dollar of aid recasts reconstruction as an opportunity for profit rather than a humanitarian imperative. Such a framework risks transforming Gaza into a testing ground for neoliberal experiments, privileging investors over displaced families.
Robert Gabriel: political operative
Robert Gabriel, a deputy national security adviser, is a political operative. His career has been devoted to advancing the far‑right agenda rather than diplomacy. He served as a policy adviser for Stephen Miller during Trump’s first campaign and helped craft some of the administration’s harshest immigration speeches. Later he joined Miller in the White House as a special assistant before moving to Fox News, where he produced segments for Laura Ingraham’s primetime show and honed talking points attacking refugees and Muslims. This background signals not only a lack of experience in conflict resolution but an ideological hostility toward the very population he is meant to help.
More recently Gabriel worked closely with Susie Wiles, the campaign manager credited with orchestrating Trump’s comeback, and ran Gabriel Strategies, a consultancy that drew millions from Trump‑aligned committees. His appointment to the Gaza board cements the transformation of US foreign policy into an extension of domestic political operations. It underscores that the board’s purpose is not to listen to Palestinians but to reinforce Trumpian narratives and reward loyalists. As a result, Gabriel’s presence all but guarantees that decisions will be filtered through partisan politics, not humanitarian needs.
US funding fuels the war
Any assessment of the board must grapple with the fact that the United States is not a neutral broker. US military aid to Israel since October 2023 has reached about $21.7 billion, and Israel’s fleet of F‑15s, F‑16s, F‑35s and most attack helicopters are US‑supplied. Additional operations push total US spending above $31 billion, while more than one‑tenth of Gaza’s population has been killed or injured and over five million people displaced. Analysts note that Israel would be “hard pressed” to sustain its assault without US weapons and logistics and warn that continued support risks dragging Washington into a wider war. It has also been pointed out that Israel’s wars in Gaza, Lebanon and Iran could not continue without US backing. In short, the architects of the Board of Peace come from the very country financing the destruction they now claim to repair.
A farcical peace
The Board of Peace cannot be understood in isolation from this context. It is a US‑led project staffed by individuals whose records include launching wars, profiting from regional instability, and advocating for Israel’s military objectives. It excludes the people of Gaza, treats the territory as a laboratory for neoliberal reconstruction, and assumes that peace can be dictated from Washington, London, and Wall Street. Meanwhile, Israeli bombs continue to fall, a blockade prevents basic relief, and US taxpayers bankroll the assault.
This arrangement offends both moral sensibilities and constitutional principles. Those who believe in self‑government should recoil at a foreign board imposed on an occupied land. Those who oppose endless wars should note that the same officials who championed the invasion of Iraq, proposed ethnic cleansing in Gaza, and call for the eradication of Hamas now style themselves as peace‑builders. If this board accomplishes anything, it will be to launder responsibility for ongoing atrocities. Genuine peace for Gaza will not come from imperial committees or private‑equity funds; it will come when the bombing stops, the blockade ends, and Palestinians regain control over their own future.
Alan Mosley is a historian, jazz musician, policy researcher for the Tenth Amendment Center, and host of It’s Too Late, “The #1 Late Night Show in America (NOT hosted by a Communist)!” New episodes debut every Wednesday night at 9ET across all major platforms; just search “AlanMosleyTV” or “It’s Too Late with Alan Mosley.”
