The world is completely divided over U.S. President Donald Trump’s proposal for a Gaza Peace Board. Inviting India to participate in establishing peace in Gaza could be significant, but India chose to maintain distance by being absent from Trump’s unveiling ceremony. The three UN veto powers — France, China, and the UK — have also distanced themselves from the Gaza Peace Board. India and Russia have not yet made any decision on joining. Russian President Vladimir Putin has stated that he will consider joining the board only if some concessions are offered regarding the Ukraine war. France has declined citing policy reasons, while China stated that it remains committed to defending the United Nations and preserving the international order centered on it. Regarding India, the government is assessing what would be right or wrong for its interests.
Several questions have arisen regarding Trump’s Gaza Peace Board. The first is whether Trump intends to weaken the role of the United Nations and create his own version of the UN. What does he hope to achieve through this board? Given Trump’s trend toward unchecked imperialistic power, should India support such an initiative?
India has long been seen as a balanced, responsible, and dialogue-oriented nation. India has contributed to UN peacekeeping missions for decades. Its experience and non-aligned foreign policy make it a reliable partner in global peace efforts. However, Trump’s Gaza Peace Board is a highly sensitive issue for India.
Historically, India has supported Palestinian self-determination, a two-state solution, and UN resolutions. At the same time, India has strengthened strategic ties with Israel in recent years. This has led India to refrain from giving a public response so far. India consistently maintains that the Israel-Palestine dispute should be resolved through UN resolutions and dialogue. Since Trump’s board is outside the UN framework, India has avoided openly supporting it.
India continues to provide humanitarian aid to Gaza, but remaining silent on the political framework gives it diplomatic flexibility. India’s current strategy seems to follow a “wait and watch” approach.
There are multiple reasons why India has avoided joining the board:
-
India does not want to be seen as backing any single country or individual.
-
India can continue humanitarian assistance in Gaza independently, as it has historically done.
-
It can collaborate through UN agencies for reconstruction.
-
Diplomatic channels under international law can be used without compromising justice or being associated with politically biased processes.
Trump has also requested $1 billion for membership in the board, but the question for India is not about money. It is about constitutional principles, moral responsibility, strategic autonomy, and credibility.
Another major concern is the inclusion of India’s traditional adversaries — Pakistan and Turkey — in the board. Both countries have historically plotted against India, and Pakistan continues to sponsor terrorism. India would not want to weaken its efforts to expose Pakistan on the international stage by joining a board with them.
Defense experts note that Pakistan could undermine any Indian efforts in Gaza. Moreover, Trump’s lifetime chairmanship of the board is problematic. India, as a sovereign nation, would need to take the initiative if it decides to join.
The board’s charter also includes provisions beyond the Gaza conflict, which has raised concerns among European governments. This could weaken the role of the United Nations, allowing Trump-created institutions to intervene independently. Including Pakistan in the board seems almost farcical. There are even doubts whether financially bankrupt Pakistan would contribute $1 billion or engage with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu on Gaza peace, given its historic opposition to Israel.
India must carefully assess Trump’s invitation, as a refusal might be seen as an insult by an unpredictable U.S. President. India is currently facing tariffs of up to 50% from the U.S., and Trump’s role in ceasefire initiatives between India and Pakistan has not been significant. India needs to consider the potential consequences, especially since Trump has presented the board as “a bold new approach to resolving global conflicts.”
With European and NATO countries already opposing Trump on issues like Greenland, and Trump himself making erratic statements, India must act cautiously. Complex issues such as disarming Hamas and ensuring the withdrawal of Israeli forces make the situation even more sensitive. Trump cannot be allowed unchecked authority in such matters.
