DaysofPal- The U.S. President Donald Trump has presented the so-called “Peace Council” not as a conventional diplomatic initiative, but as a new model of governance that sidesteps established international institutions and places Gaza at the center of an unprecedented political experiment.
Trump’s call on world leaders to join a council under his personal leadership, requiring substantial financial contributions in exchange for permanent membership, has been widely interpreted as an effort not to end the war, but to redefine who controls devastated territories and decides the fate of their populations, beyond the authority of the United Nations and international law.
Within this framework, Gaza appears to be only the first case. The complete absence of Palestinian representation, alongside references to voluntary displacement and reconstruction tied to political conditions, has raised serious questions about the meaning of the proposed peace.
Critics argue that the initiative may be less about resolving a humanitarian disaster and more about testing a post-war governance model based on power, wealth, and influence, one that could later be applied to other conflict zones.
In a critical review, Britain’s The Guardian described the Peace Council as part of a broader neo-colonial trend that extends beyond Gaza and challenges the foundations of the international system.
Journalist Owen Jones wrote that excluding Palestinians altogether, while opening the door to authoritarian leaders, business figures, and real estate interests, suggests Gaza is being treated as a laboratory for post-destruction governance driven by force and capital.
The newspaper warned that transforming Gaza into a testing ground for imposed administration and surveillance threatens not only Palestinians but international law itself, as legal frameworks are replaced by transactional models rooted in influence rather than rights.
According to Trump, the Peace Council would oversee Gaza’s post-war phase and manage reconstruction through an international funding mechanism.
Countries seeking permanent membership would be required to make large financial contributions.
The U.S. Secretary of State has said that between 20 and 25 countries have expressed willingness to join the council, most recently including the Israeli Prime Minister.
The body would operate entirely outside the United Nations or any existing international institution and would be led by Trump in a personal capacity, rather than as a sitting U.S. official.
Draft versions of the proposed charter, cited by international media, indicate that Trump would exercise direct oversight over the fund and its financing.
The documents reportedly exclude Palestinian participation, make no reference to the UN or its agencies, and provide no clear criteria for membership or a timeline for implementation.
Political analyst Talal Awkal said the Peace Council cannot be separated from the broader context of the war on Gaza or from shifts in the global order.
He described Gaza as having been turned into a “political testing ground” for projects that extend far beyond reconstruction.
“Gaza is not being approached as a humanitarian or political issue requiring a just solution,” Awkal told Palestine Online.
“It is being treated as a prototype for managing destroyed territories by force, without respect for international law or the rights of the indigenous population. The exclusion of Palestinians is not accidental; it is central to the concept.”
Awkal also pointed to Trump’s remarks suggesting Gaza’s residents could leave if better opportunities were available, describing them as a revival of long-standing strategies aimed at emptying land of its people and reconfiguring it politically and economically.
“What is described as voluntary displacement is, in reality, the result of making life unlivable,” he said.
He warned that removing the United Nations from a case as significant as Gaza would dismantle one of the last remaining pillars of international legitimacy, replacing law-based governance with systems driven by money and power.
Ahmed Rafiq Awad, a political analyst and professor of media studies at Al-Quds University–Abu Dis, said the most dangerous aspect of the Peace Council lies not in its members, but in the principle behind it: the deliberate bypassing of international legitimacy, particularly the United Nations.
Awad said Trump has openly challenged the post–World War II international order, which, despite its shortcomings, imposes legal and moral limits on power. Proposing an alternative to the UN, he argued, reflects a broader project to redistribute global authority outside multilateral institutions.
According to Awad, Gaza was chosen precisely because of its political vulnerability and the perception that the cost of experimentation there would be minimal.
Excluding the UN, he said, effectively removes legal frameworks governing occupation, refugee rights, and accountability for war crimes, transforming the issue from one of rights into one of management.
“When tragedy is managed instead of resolved, the victim becomes a budget item in a reconstruction plan,” Awad said.
He warned that if such a model gains acceptance, it could be replicated in other conflict zones, from Ukraine to parts of Africa, ushering in an era of “regulated international chaos.”
“What we are witnessing is not the sudden collapse of the international system,” Awad concluded, noting that “ its gradual erosion, beginning with causes seen as least protected. Gaza now stands at the center of that erosion.”
Shortlink for this post: https://daysofpalestine.ps/?p=71582
