By Suresh Unnithan
In a move that has startled the international diplomatic arena, US President Donald Trump has extended a formal invitation to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to join the newly formed “Board of Peace” for Gaza. Announced on January 16, 2026, as part of the second phase of a fragile ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, the board is positioned as a multinational body tasked with overseeing the reconstruction, stabilization, and transitional governance of the war-torn region. Trump, who has appointed himself as chair, has assembled a core team including US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, while extending invitations to leaders from Pakistan, India, and reportedly others like Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The invitation, conveyed through a letter shared publicly by US Ambassador to India Sergio Gor, frames the initiative as a “critically historic and magnificent effort to solidify peace” in the Middle East and beyond. Yet, as India weighs its response—sources indicate no official reply has been issued yet—this development raises pointed questions about Trump’s underlying strategy, its broader implications, and whether it represents a genuine olive branch or a calculated trap for Modi.
Decoding Trump’s Plan: Peace or Power Play?
At its core, the Board of Peace appears to be Trump’s attempt to imprint his brand of deal-making on one of the world’s most intractable conflicts. The initiative emerges from a US-brokered ceasefire framework, with the board intended to guide post-conflict efforts under UN auspices. Proponents argue it could inject fresh momentum into Gaza’s rebuilding, leveraging international expertise and funds to address humanitarian crises, infrastructure collapse, and governance vacuums left by years of violence.
However, critics view this as classic Trumpian theater—more spectacle than substance. Trump’s history of high-profile diplomatic gambits, from North Korea summits to the Abraham Accords, often prioritized photo-ops and personal acclaim over sustainable outcomes. Here, the board’s structure, with Trump at the helm and a reported demand for $1 billion contributions from participating nations (funds he would ostensibly control), smacks of a fundraising scheme masquerading as philanthropy. Skeptics on platforms like X have dubbed it a “pay-to-play” peace club, questioning how such financial barriers promote inclusivity or equity in global conflict resolution. Moreover, inviting both India and Pakistan—nuclear-armed rivals with their own fraught history—into the same forum could either foster unlikely cooperation or ignite new tensions, depending on how the dynamics unfold.
Trump’s plan also aligns with his broader foreign policy revival: a muscular, America-first approach that seeks to sideline multilateral institutions like the UN in favor of ad-hoc coalitions. By roping in emerging powers like India, Trump may aim to counterbalance influences from China or Iran in the Middle East, while burnishing his image as a peacemaker ahead of domestic political battles.
The Impacts on India: Boon or Burden?
For India, the invitation underscores its rising stature on the global stage. Under Modi, New Delhi has positioned itself as a voice for the Global South, advocating balanced diplomacy in conflicts like Ukraine and Gaza. Joining the board could amplify India’s role in Middle East affairs, where it has economic stakes—think energy imports, diaspora communities, and trade routes. It might also strengthen India-US ties, especially amid ongoing trade strains, by signaling alignment on security issues. Pro-Modi voices on social media have hailed it as a “burnol moment” for critics, framing it as validation of India’s indispensability in world affairs.
Yet, the potential downsides are significant and warrant scrutiny. India’s foreign policy has long emphasized non-alignment and strategic autonomy, avoiding entanglements in others’ wars. Diving into Gaza’s quagmire could expose India to reputational risks if the board falters—as similar initiatives have in the past—or if it’s perceived as endorsing Israel’s policies, alienating Muslim-majority partners in the Arab world and domestically. The financial ask alone—a billion-dollar entry fee—raises eyebrows, potentially straining India’s budget at a time when domestic priorities like infrastructure and poverty alleviation demand resources.
Moreover, the invitation arrives against a backdrop of US-India frictions, including tariffs and intellectual property disputes. Could this be leverage? Trump’s track record suggests he views alliances transactionally; participation might come with unspoken expectations, such as concessions in trade talks or support for US positions on China.
A Deliberate Trap for Modi?
The notion of a “trap” isn’t far-fetched when examining Trump’s playbook. Modi has previously rebuffed Trump’s mediation offers, notably on Kashmir, insisting India handles its affairs independently. By inviting Modi to a high-visibility forum alongside Pakistan’s leadership, Trump might be engineering a scenario where refusal appears isolationist, while acceptance pulls India into a US-orchestrated narrative. As one analyst on X noted, “Peace and Pakistan cannot be in the same room,” highlighting the risk of diplomatic awkwardness or escalation.
Critically, this could be a ploy to co-opt Modi’s global popularity for Trump’s domestic agenda. With the US midterm elections looming in 2026, a star-studded board could distract from controversies at home. For Modi, domestically, it might play well with his base as a sign of strength, but any perceived capitulation to US demands could fuel opposition narratives of subservience. Historical parallels abound: Trump’s 2019 “mediation” overtures on Kashmir were seen as a trap that Modi deftly avoided.
Trump’s Gaza Board of Peace invitation to Modi is a double-edged sword—offering a platform for influence while laden with pitfalls. In a multipolar world, India must prioritize its interests: fostering peace without compromising sovereignty or resources. If history is any guide, Modi may politely decline, as he has before, preserving India’s flexible diplomacy. Ultimately, true peace in Gaza requires inclusive, impartial efforts, not celebrity-led boards with hefty price tags. For now, the world watches as New Delhi deliberates, hoping this move advances stability rather than serving as another chapter in Trump’s art of the deal
