WHEN the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 2803 on Nov 17, 2025, it expected the Board of Peace (BoP) to be a transitional administration that would coordinate funding for Gaza’s redevelopment until such time the Palestinian Authority completed its reform programme and conditions were in place for a credible pathway to Palestinian statehood. The resolution authorised the creation of a transitional governance administration, including a Palestinian technocratic, apolitical committee of competent Palestinians from the Gaza Strip to administer the territory and the establishment of a temporary International Stabilisation Force (ISF) in Gaza.

Three months after the resolution’s adoption, the BoP held its first formal meeting on Feb 19, 2026, in Washington. While officials from 50 nations attended the meeting, only 27, including some notable Arab and Muslim countries, have joined the BoP as members so far. Countries like China, Russia and France stayed away due to lack of clarity on the BoP’s scope. The confusion followed President Donald Trump’s statement that the BoP’s remit could expand beyond Gaza to address other conflicts worldwide. Understandably, the EU would not like the BoP to talk about Greenland, nor would India wish it to discuss Indian-occupied Kashmir. Ironically, while the BoP has been set up to discuss issues relating to Gaza’s future, it has no Palestinian member, even though Israel is one. While Trump characterised the BoP as the “most consequential international body in history”, its members are well aware that it essentially revolves around the persona of the US president and can never be a replacement for the UN, the most representative body for conflict resolution.

There were three immediate expectations from the BoP’s first meeting, nearly all of which have fallen short. Firstly, the world expected the BoP to take steps towards the solemn implementation of the Oct 10, 2025, ceasefire, which ended a brutal two-year war imposed by Israel on Gaza’s residents, killing over 72,000 people, destroying 80 per cent of its buildings and displacing 2.1 million Gazans. Sadly, the ceasefire has not been fully implemented as Israel has continued its killing spree daily, slaughtering over 600 Palestinians since the ceasefire.

Pakistan has taken a prudent position.

Another expectation from the BoP was to ensure that humanitarian assistance would flow in. Although assistance has started coming into Gaza to provide food, rehabilitate hospitals and clear the rubble, the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has observed that the Palestinians continue to suffer “displacement, trauma, uncertainty and deprivation”. The European Commissioner for Equality, Preparedness and Crisis Management has also noted that humanitarian aid was entering Gaza “drop by drop” and needed expanded access through the Rafah crossing. More than 600 aid workers have been killed. For his part, Trump informed the BoP that the US would contribute $10 billion and that nine countries had pledged $7bn towards a reconstruction fund. However, Israel has conditioned any reconstruction on the demilitarisation of the Gaza Strip and the disarmament of Hamas. The Israeli prime minister is keen to disarm Hamas, but fails to recognise that the Israeli Defence Forces are still occupying over half of Gaza and continue to bomb innocent Palestinians. Hamas is reluctant to surrender its arms as it fears Israeli reprisals, but is ready to hand over the administration to a committee of Palestinian technocrats.

The third expectation from the BoP’s first meeting was to work towards creating conditions for Palestin­ian self-determination and statehood. There appears to be no progress towards this pivotal issue, which must be addressed if the world wishes to see lasting peace in the Middle East. Amidst news of Israeli plans to integrate the West Bank, the US ambassador to Israel has termed the establishment of Greater Israel a biblical right of the Jewish state. This statement was strongly condemned by Arab and other Muslim states. Although the statement was later downplayed, it is being interpreted as tacit US support for the creation of Greater Israel on lands stretching from the Euphrates to the Nile.

As for the proposed ISF, five countries, including Indonesia, have volunteered to provide troops. However, troop-contributing countries would not want to be in a situation where they either fight Hamas or the Israeli forces. For its part, Pakistan has prudently decided to not commit any troops for the ISF until Israeli forces have withdrawn from Gaza and a Palestinian administration is in place. Commendably, Pakistan was one of the strongest voices at the BoP for the rights of the Palestinians, including self-determination and statehood.

The writer is former foreign secretary and chairman Sanober Institute Islamabad.

Published in Dawn, March 1st, 2026