Trump’s Gaza “Board of Peace” Pulls Turkey Into a New U.S. Diplomatic Experiment

Invitations to President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Argentina’s Javier Milei signal a bid to build a new, leader-driven coalition for Gaza. The proposal raises questions about legitimacy, funding—and what a higher Turkish profile could mean in Washington.

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration’s latest attempt to reshape Middle East diplomacy is taking form not as a treaty or a traditional summit, but as something closer to a club: a “Board of Peace” intended to oversee parts of a Gaza peace and reconstruction plan, whose membership is being assembled through invitation letters to world leaders.

According to reporting distributed by Bloomberg and republished elsewhere, President Trump invited Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Argentina’s President Javier Milei to join what was described as a Gaza-focused “Board of Peace,” part of a broader “Board of Peace” concept. Milei publicly thanked Trump for the invitation; Turkish officials said Erdoğan had also been invited as a founding member. The Straits Times, Buenos Aires Times

The invitations, as described in the reporting, frame participation as both moral leadership and an investment proposition: a “distinguished group of nations” asked to “build lasting peace” and “invest in a secure and prosperous future.” The Straits Times, Buenos Aires Times

But the project’s outlines also suggest why it has quickly become controversial. Separate reporting says the administration has discussed a structure in which countries can obtain a permanent seat by paying $1 billion, while others would rotate on three-year terms—an arrangement critics have portrayed as “pay-to-play,” even as supporters argue it is a way to fund reconstruction. CNBC, CNN

A Turkey-shaped signal

Inviting Erdoğan is not merely a diplomatic courtesy; it is a strategic signal. Turkey is one of the few regional powers with active political relationships across multiple camps relevant to Gaza’s future. A formal role—however defined—would place Ankara closer to the center of a U.S.-designed framework at a moment when Middle East alignments are in flux.

A related reporting thread suggests this initiative is not limited to Turkey and Argentina. Russia’s Vladimir Putin was also invited, according to Kremlin statements cited by major outlets—an extraordinary inclusion for a body described as peace-focused. CNN, CNBC

In addition, Fox News reported that a Gaza Board of Peace charter signing ceremony took place in Davos and listed countries called to sign; Turkey was represented by Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan. Fox News

The effort’s internal governance is also described as unusually personality-driven. Reporting circulated by Bloomberg and republished in Buenos Aires Times and Straits Times described an initial executive lineup that included Secretary of State Marco Rubio, envoy Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner, and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair; it also referenced Bulgarian diplomat Nickolay Mladenov as chief executive officer. Buenos Aires Times, The Straits Times

What this could mean for the United States

For Washington, the “Board of Peace” approach implies three big shifts:

A new channel alongside (or in tension with) traditional institutions.
The reporting frames the initiative as a vehicle for a sweeping, potentially long-term Gaza plan, with governance and reconstruction components. Whether it complements or competes with existing multilateral mechanisms will shape how allies respond. The Straits Times
A funding model that could become the story.
If the $1 billion “permanent seat” concept becomes central, the initiative may be judged less on diplomacy and more on legitimacy, accountability, and who controls the money. That dynamic could complicate bipartisan support in Congress and raise scrutiny from watchdog groups. CNBC, CNN
A “coalition-of-invitees” model that privileges leader-to-leader politics.
Invitations are being revealed mainly through foreign governments and leaders, not through a single, transparent White House rollout—suggesting a high degree of informality and personalization in the enterprise. CNN

What this could mean for Turkish Americans in the U.S.

For Turkish Americans—especially civic and political organizations—an expanded Turkish role in a U.S.-led Gaza framework can have real second-order effects at home:

Higher visibility means higher scrutiny.
If Turkey is perceived as a “founding” participant, Turkish Americans may see more media attention and more political crossfire—especially given how Gaza politics can polarize U.S. communities.
Opportunity to emphasize constructive diplomacy.
A formal role for Turkey can be framed not as ideology, but as conflict stabilization, reconstruction, humanitarian access, and regional security—areas where diaspora voices can advocate for practical outcomes rather than slogans.
Increased competition in Washington’s diaspora ecosystem.
Greater Turkish visibility on Gaza could intensify lobbying pressures from multiple ethnic, religious, and advocacy blocs. Turkish-American groups may need disciplined messaging: pro-peace, pro-rule-of-law, pro-humanitarian outcomes, and pro-U.S. interests.
A reminder that U.S.–Turkey ties can swing quickly.
If the Board becomes controversial (for funding, membership, or perceived politicization), Turkey’s participation could become a domestic U.S. political talking point—affecting community perceptions regardless of the actual policy substance.

Sources (quick list)

Invitation reporting (Erdogan + Milei): The Straits Times, Buenos Aires Times
Broader invitees + funding/permanent seat discussion: CNBC, CNN
Davos charter signing list incl. Turkey represented by Hakan Fidan: Fox News