Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif is in Washington to attend the global summit of theBoard of Peace(BoP) hosted by US President Donald Trump, where a key decision on the Gaza crisis is expected. Pakistan, which appeared to have moved swiftly to join Trump’s Peace Board, now finds itself in a difficult spot as it risks walking into another diplomatic trap. The stakes could not be higher for Islamabad. On one hand, it seeks to nurture its budding ties with the United States and President Trump; on the other, its domestic political compulsions and broader geopolitical positioning push it to support Palestinian statehood and oppose Israeli moves toward annexation in the West Bank.
The summit’s agenda is expected to focus on three priorities — consolidating a ceasefire in Gaza, mobilising financial pledges for the BoP (with Washington committing an initial $5 billion), and finalising the structure of a proposed global forum that Trump hopes can succeed where the United Nations has struggled.
Central to the discussions is the proposed International Stabilisation Force (ISF), envisioned to secure reconstruction zones and support post-conflict governance in Gaza. For Pakistan, the politically sensitive question is whether it will contribute troops.
Also Read:Trump Unveils ‘Board of Peace’ Plan — What Is It and Who’s Paying $5B for Gaza?
The troop issue reportedly surfaced during conversations between Pakistan’s Army Chief Field Marshal Asim Munir and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference. Any commitment to the ISF could entangle Islamabad in a volatile situation where Muslim-majority countries are wary of being drawn into direct confrontation with Hamas.
Diplomatic sources indicate that while several Muslim states are open to joining a stabilisation mechanism, they are reluctant to accept combat roles. They are also pressing for a credible political pathway toward Palestinian statehood and opposing Israeli moves toward annexation in the West Bank - conditions that may complicate Trump’s coalition-driven model.
The BoP’s institutional structure, a compact, leader-driven body with an operational arm in the ISF and a dedicated financing pool, reflects Washington’s preference for coalition frameworks operating outside the slower multilateral system of the UN. That design has raised questions about legality, legitimacy and long-term viability.
Maleeha Lodhi, Pakistan’s former ambassador to the United States, Britain and the United Nations, offered a blunt assessment.
“The jury is out on whether the Board of Peace can deliver peace. The absence of any Palestinian representation on the Board raises questions about its legitimacy,” she said. “If the principal party to the issue is excluded, how is this going to advance the peace process or carve out a post-conflict future for the people of Gaza,” Lodhi told Pakistani news outlet Dawn.
Dr Lodhi also warned against externally imposed governance structures. “Externally controlled governance arrangements make this a colonial-style project,” she observed, adding that “at least half of the countries invited to be members didn’t join the body as they had reservations about its role, legality and effectiveness as well as Trump’s pretension of turning this into a parallel body to the UN Security Council”.
Source: India Latest News, Breaking News Today, Top News Headlines | Times Now
