Donald Trump has called his Board of Peace potentially the most consequential board ever assembled. But in the measured language of international relations, what would actual success look like — and how far away is it from where things stand today?
Success would mean Hamas verifiably disarming — surrendering not just heavy weapons but the estimated 60,000 rifles Netanyahu has specified, in a process monitored by credible international observers. It would mean the transitional Palestinian committee leaving Egypt and establishing functioning governance in Gaza. It would mean the International Stabilization Force deploying and securing the territory. And it would mean reconstruction beginning in earnest against the $70 billion estimated need.
Beyond Gaza, Trump’s ambitions for the board include challenging the UN Security Council’s conflict-resolution role. Success on that dimension would require the board demonstrating that it can resolve conflicts that the Security Council cannot — a standard that would take years to assess and would depend on outcomes in contexts well beyond Gaza.
Where things stand today: Hamas has not disarmed. The governing committee is in Egypt. The stabilization force has not deployed. Reconstruction pledges total a claimed $5 billion — unverified — against a $70 billion need. Daily strikes continue. Key allies have stayed home. Palestinians were excluded.
The distance between today’s reality and any meaningful definition of success is substantial. The board’s first meeting Thursday was a necessary beginning. But the board should be judged not by the ambition of its launch but by the conditions on the ground in Gaza in six months, twelve months, and beyond. Success, when it comes, will be measured in Palestinian lives improved — not in Washington conference room achievements.