Hungary in Gaza Board of Peace: Unity or doubts?
While Hungary has expressed enthusiastic support, several major European powers have rejected Donald Trump’s latest initiative, the so-called Board of Peace. But what exactly is this body, and what would participation entail?
The “Board of Peace” initiated by Donald Trump is a new type of international body originally intended to oversee the post-conflict settlement of the Gaza Strip and the management of a transitional administration. In principle, it would be established with UN approval, although this acknowledgment would apply only to participation in the Gaza settlement itself. Trump envisions the body as a strongly personalized structure in which—unlike traditional multilateral organizations—he himself would occupy a permanent leadership role.
One of the most controversial aspects of the Board of Peace is its proposed financing model. Trump and his supporters have suggested a contribution of USD 1 billion (approximately HUF 331 billion) for countries seeking “permanent membership” in the body. Many analysts interpret this approach as a “pay-to-play” diplomatic club rather than a traditional UN-type organization, where membership is not tied to financial contributions.
International reactions have been mixed. Several Western allies—particularly European countries—have responded cautiously or critically to the initiative, partly because they see it as creating a parallel structure to the United Nations that could erode multilateral norms and legitimacy. In other regions, such as parts of the Arab world, some actors have expressed a degree of hope, albeit accompanied by criticism.
The Board of Peace is therefore not a classical, independent international organization, but rather a political construct in many respects. Its mandate and operational framework remain only partially defined, and the initiative raises concerns regarding risks, ambiguities, and questions of legitimacy.
Hungary among the big players
Hungary’s planned participation makes the diplomatic situation particularly noteworthy. The Hungarian government has accepted the invitation and announced that it will join the Gaza Board of Peace as a founding member, as reported by the Hungarian press: In the short term, this provides Hungary with visibility and opportunities for relationship-building, particularly within political circles close to Trump, it reflects Hungary’s continuous efforts to play an active role in global politics.
At the same time, it is important to realistically assess the risks and burdens involved. In its current form, the body may pose political risks for Hungary’s relations with EU and NATO partners, as many Western countries view the initiative with skepticism and do not consider it part of the traditional mechanisms of multilateral diplomacy. The model surrounding the “membership fee,” even if Hungary does not undertake a direct financial commitment, may also create communication and reputational challenges in domestic political discourse, raising questions about what tangible benefits participation would deliver and at what cost. Moreover, the mandate and authority of the body remain unclear and are not legally enforceable.
For Hungary, joining the Trump-led Board of Peace would therefore be unlikely to provide automatic institutional influence or multilateral legitimacy.
