Trump Proposes 'Board of Peace' with Russia and China

Moscow open to idea, Beijing declines citing commitment to UN system

Published on Feb. 28, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

US President Donald Trump has proposed establishing a 'Board of Peace' to guide the stabilization of Gaza following the recent Israel-Hamas war, and has invited Russia and China to join. Moscow has signaled openness to the idea, while Beijing has declined, citing its commitment to the UN-centered international system.

Why it matters

Trump's proposal for a 'Board of Peace' outside the UN framework raises questions about the role of major powers in global conflict resolution, and whether such an ad-hoc body could undermine established multilateral institutions.

The details

The board, chaired by Trump for life, has already drawn commitments of $10 billion from the US and $7 billion from nine other member nations, including Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, the UAE, and several Middle Eastern countries. However, several major Western countries have declined to join, citing concerns about Russian involvement and the potential to undermine UN authority.

  • The board held its inaugural meeting in Washington in February 2026.
  • Over 20 nations have accepted the American invitation to join the board, with roughly 35 expressing interest.

The players

Donald Trump

The President of the United States who proposed the 'Board of Peace'.

Vladimir Putin

The President of Russia, who has signaled openness to contributing $1 billion from frozen Russian sovereign assets to the board.

China

The country that has declined to join the 'Board of Peace', citing its commitment to the UN-centered international system.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What’s next

The 'Board of Peace' is expected to hold further meetings to finalize its membership and begin overseeing the reconstruction and ceasefire implementation in Gaza.

The takeaway

Trump's proposal for a 'Board of Peace' outside the UN framework highlights the ongoing tensions between major powers over the role of multilateral institutions in global conflict resolution, and the potential for ad-hoc bodies to undermine established norms and processes.