Trump approves at least five committees to run Gaza, with nobody wanting to go after Hamas

January 20, 2026 • 9:30 am

Well, the cease-fire agreements in Gaza are proceeding, as Trump has appointed some committees (all approved by the UN) to run the territory. But again we have a dog’s breakfast, as there are multiple committees with two big problems: there are at least five committees with somewhat overlapping functions and members, and, second, there is no roadmap for the major task of getting rid of Hamas.

Here’s the composition as given by the NYT (bolding below is mine):

Mr. Trump’s “Board of Peace,” which he named himself the chairman of, is backed by a legal United Nations mandate and had previously been expected to be composed of world leaders who would supervise the Trump administration’s plan for an “International Stabilization Force” to occupy, demilitarize and govern Gaza during a yearslong reconstruction effort.

But the list of officials on the executive board announced on Monday included three members of the Trump administration — Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Steve Witkoff and Robert Gabriel — as well as Jared Kushner, Mr. Trump’s son-in-law; Ajay Banga, the head of the World Bank; the billionaire Trump ally Marc Rowan; and former Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain. Of the seven, only Mr. Blair is not American, and he was previously the Middle East envoy for the Quartet, a diplomatic group made up of the United States, Russia, the United Nations and the European Union, and considered a candidate to lead a transitional government in Gaza.

A second executive board, similarly named the “Gaza executive board,” includes a wider roster of foreign officials from Europe and the Middle East, and is implied to be in a supporting role. Some American officials sit on both executive boards, as well as Mr. Blair.

Maj. Gen. Jasper Jeffers, the commander of U.S. Special Operations Command Central, which operates in the Middle East, was also tapped to lead the “International Stabilization Force,” the peacekeeping force authorized by the United Nations to be deployed to Gaza as part of the peace plan. General Jeffers previously helped oversee a brokered cease-fire between Israel and Lebanon last year.

Note that what seems to be the most important committee is almost all American, and the peacekeeping force, which presumably will be tasked with disarming Hamas, is also headed by an American general.  So who is going to disarm Hamas? Israel can’t, as that would violate the ceasefire agreement, and the U.S. certainly won’t send troops to Gaza. So how will Hamas disarm and disband: the first item on Trump’s agenda?

Trump apparently will solve it by threats:

It is not clear how the international force would ensure that Gaza is demilitarized. Hamas, which specializes in insurgent tactics and has not disbanded its battalions of armed fighters, has long regarded giving up all its weapons as tantamount to surrender, with armed struggle against Israel a crucial part of its ideology. On Thursday, Mr. Trump threatened Hamas with a renewed conflict if they did not disarm, writing on social media: “they can do this the easy way, or the hard way.”

The Times of Israel, as usual, has more information about the committees, and notes that the Board of Peace isn’t really the most important board, with the Gaza Executive Board really tasked with doing the heavy lifting. Bold headings are mine. And the ToI article implies that the NYT missed two committees:

The Board of Peace:

The Board of Peace is the umbrella body that was mandated by the UN Security Council to oversee the postwar management of Gaza until the end of 2027.

The Board of Peace is chaired by Trump, and will largely be made up of heads of state from around the world.

Formal invitations to become members of the Board of Peace were sent out on Friday, and by Saturday the leaders of Turkey, Egypt, Canada and Argentina confirmed having received the offer — an indication that they will likely accept

While this is the most prominent of all the panels established, the Board of Peace will play a generally symbolic role and be more relevant during the fundraising stage, a senior Arab diplomat told The Times of Israel.

The Gaza Executive Board:

The Gaza Executive Board is the operational arm of the Board of Peace and the body that will actually oversee the postwar management of Gaza.

Sitting on the Executive Board are Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, senior Qatari diplomat Ali Thawadi, Egyptian intelligence chief Hassan Rashad, UAE Minister of International Cooperation Reem Al-Hashimy, former UK prime minister Tony Blair, US special envoy Steve Witkoff, top Trump aide Jared Kushner, Apollo Global Management CEO Marc Rowan, Israeli-Cypriot businessman Yakir Gabay, former UN humanitarian coordinator Sigrid Kaag, and former UN envoy to the Mideast Nickolay Mladenov.

Israel has expressed opposition to the makeup of the Executive Board, apparently taking issue with the inclusion of representatives from Turkey and Qatar, who were heavily critical of its prosecution of the war in Gaza.

However, the inclusion of both countries demonstrates their perceived utility to Trump, who has touted his personal relationships with the leaders of Turkey and Qatar as well as their success in pressuring Hamas to accept a ceasefire deal in October.

The Founding Executive Board:

In addition to inexplicably sharing nearly the same name as the Gaza Executive Board, the Founding Executive Board also consists of many of the same members.

Joining Witkoff, Kushner, Blair and Rowan on this additional board are US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, World Bank president Ajay Banga and Trump’s former deputy national security adviser Robert Gabriel.

The White House said that each member of the Founding Executive Board “will oversee a defined portfolio critical to Gaza’s stabilization and long-term success, including, but not limited to, governance capacity-building, regional relations, reconstruction, investment attraction, large-scale funding, and capital mobilization.”

The National Committee for the Administration of Gaza:

. . . .The National Committee for the Administration of Gaza is the committee of Palestinian technocrats that will be tasked with running daily affairs on the ground and providing services for Gazans in place of Hamas.

While Egypt, in announcing the new panel, claimed it consists of 15 members, the actual figure is 12, and they are headed by former Palestinian Authority deputy planning minister Ali Shaath.

. . . . Each of the other panel members was given a portfolio covering the fields in which they are experts.

Abdul Karim Ashour, who heads an agricultural non-profit, will serve as agriculture commissioner.

Aed Yaghi, who currently heads the Palestinian Medical Relief Society, will serve as health commissioner.

Osama Sa’adawi, who previously headed the Palestinian Housing Council nonprofit, will serve as housing commissioner.

Adnan Abu Warda, a former PA Supreme Constitutional Court judge, will serve as justice commissioner.

Maj. Gen. Sami Nassman, who has served in the PA’s General Intelligence Service and is seen as a strong opponent of Hamas, will serve as internal security and police commissioner

And so on, including commissioners for water and municipal affairs, social affairs, communications, economy, and trade. You can see that their duties will overlap. Who resolves conflicts? A member of the Palestinian Authority, which of course is anti-Israel, and is an organization hated by Hamas.  Finally, there is the crucial

International Stabilization Force:

The International Stabilization Force is tasked with providing security for the Strip, while gradually phasing out the IDF, which currently remains in control of 53% of the enclave.

While the US has said the ISF will support efforts to disarm Hamas, officials familiar with the matter said the multinational force won’t be expected to engage in kinetic activity to seize weapons from the terror group, which has pledged not to give them up.

Instead, they will support the disarmament process once an agreement is reached, with mediators optimistic that Hamas will agree to a gradual process that starts with the return of heavy weapons, Arab and US officials have said.

. . .The US had struggled to convince countries to contribute troops to the ISF board amid heavy skepticism that Hamas will disarm and that the IDF will withdraw further from Gaza. One of the two countries Washington had publicly touted, Azerbaijan, announced earlier this month that it would not be participating.

US officials briefing reporters last week insisted that they now have enough countries offering troops and that an announcement can be expected in about two weeks.

This is a mess.  There are five committees whose jobs are overlapping, a heavy U.S. presence on the supervising Board of Peace, and what I see as the most important committee at the outset—the group tasked with demilitarizing Gaza by erasing Hamas—has no specified troops.

It’s not surprising that no country wants to take on Hamas, since they know the international opprobrium attached to that task.  Since Hamas refuses to disarm, this guarantees that there will be extensive fighting in Gaza for a long time to come.  Getting rid of Hamas is Job #1, and until that is done, none of the other committees can do their jobs.

Now the UN could run the whole show instead of the U.S., but that might be even worse given the UN’s hatred of Israel. I doubt that the UN has the stomach to disarm Hamas. They have UN troops that could try, but the UN troops in Lebanon, tasked with disarming Hezbollah, are completely ineffectual. UN troops would be useless against the determined fighters of Hamas.

My conclusion: this messy plan won’t work, and therefore the destruction in Gaza will continue for some time to come.  And don’t forget that Hamas and the Gazans hate the Palestinian Authority, so there can be no solution that allows the PA to run the Gaza Strip. I feel for the Gazan civilians that must endure this mishigass for years to come. If readers have an alternative solution, do suggest it below.

To describe the odious, terroristic nature of Hamas, which all of you should know about by now (even though many young Americans are on their side), I proffer Rawan Osman, a Syrian-born but pro-Israeli activist who was brought up as an Israeli-hating Muslim:

6 thoughts on “Trump approves at least five committees to run Gaza, with nobody wanting to go after Hamas

  1. Impossible to see balanced approach to Israel from the UN. At least 50 Muslim-majority countries are members and undoubtedly more with substantial Muslim populations. Not surprisingly, one Jewish-majority country and I don’t think a sizable population in any other country, also not surprising given how they’ve been scattered hither and thither over history, culminating in the Holocaust. Thessaloniki in Greece is a striking illustration. A Jewish-majority city before WW2 mostly due to expulsion from Spain, 50k of 70k were sent to concentration camps. Now about 1,000 left after further migration.

  2. What immediately jumps out at me, aside from the fact that this will fail if Hamas isn’t destroyed, is that Trump’s minions are on the committee tasked with investment and rebuilding.

    This is all about the money for him.

  3. Thank you for organizing the mess. I knew that I was reading about different committees and boards, but blew past all the names thinking that they might be the same thing or at least related. This seems like classic Trump in some ways, especially the $1 billion price tag he has put on membership on the Board of Peace.* Who holds the money? Could it be President Trump? All these boards and committees dilute the effort. Confusion will prevail and the whole enterprise risks dissolving into nothingness—or fraud.

    *https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/18/world/middleeast/trump-board-of-peace-gaza.html

  4. “Dilute….confusion….dissolving into nothingness”. Yep Norman, that’s the skill of shirking accountability. When everyone is in charge, no one is in charge. I still maintain that only Israel cares about Israel at the nation-state level.

    ( I screwed up….this was supposed to be a reply to Norman’s Comment #3, obviously.)

  5. Here is my quick take on the board structure given the reports here. The Board of Peace is symbolic and important for fundraising; it will have little to no input in Gaza operations and a marginal voice in long-term development. The Gaza Executive Board, portrayed as being the operational arm of the Board of Peace, is important for its regional representation, not only for the potential pressure that Turkey and Qatar could put on Hamas but also to assure Gaza residents not affiliated with Hamas that Islamic countries are deeply involved in their welfare. The board will principally mediate for and oversee the National Committee that runs daily affairs on the ground. I envision they will lack substantive say over strategic decisions.

    The core body for long-term direction will be the Founding Executive Board, with the notable inclusion of Marco Rubio. The US and UK membership has a foot both in the long-term direction via this board and the daily operations via the Gaza Executive Board. In theory, this should help keep daily operations in sync with longer-term objectives, which in turn will be informed by events as they unfold on the ground. While Israel may oppose Turkey, Qatar, and to a degree Egyptian representation on any board, they will have less of a problem with those countries overseeing sewage, water, housing, etc. than with setting the long-term direction for Gaza.

    Caveat. One always risks trying—especially when watching from a distance—to make sense out of something that emerged insensibly.

  6. “Mr. Trump’s “Board of Peace,” which he named himself the chairman of, is backed by a legal United Nations mandate… ”

    I guess it bears repeating: There is nothing “legal” about this UNSC resolution. The UN does NOT have Legislative powers, which means it can NOT make (International) laws.

    The NYT article refers back to a previous NYT article about the November 17th, 2025 UNSC vote, saying:

    “Security Council resolutions are considered legally binding international law,…”

    This is simply false, for the exact same reason, and more.

    No UNSC resolutions are considered actual International law. Almost all UNSC resolutions are not even considered binding. Only UNSC resolutions which are under Chapter VII of the UN Charter are considered binding. This means that nations are obligated to follow them if they wish to to have good standing. But this resolution is NOT under Chapter VII. So, not only is it not “legal”, it’s not law of any sort, and it is not even binding to UN member countries.

    This is atrocious reporting by the NYT.

Leave a Reply to Patrick Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *