As Chair of the Gaza Peace Board, “King Donald” Should Not Be Allowed to Expand His Domain

Now that Donald Trump has secured domination in the United States with control of both houses of Congress and the Supreme Court, similar foreign domination beckons. He has, most graciously, agreed to serve as Chairman of the Peace Board overseeing Gaza’s transitional governance: “They asked if I’d be the chairman of the Board of Peace. I wasn’t counting on that … but I said yes,” he demurred. Chairman of the Gaza Board of Peace is not an indirect form of oversight like that of a colonial viceroy. Trump, it has been proposed, could assume a direct position of control. Based on historical precedent, he should not be allowed to extend his domestic power to Gaza without formal legitimacy.

First, in terms of Trump’s domestic domination, there are numerous references to Donald Trump as a monarch. Writing in the New York Times about Trump’s remodelling the White House, American designer Debbie Millman noted: “Donald Trump has made his mark on democracy. But his plan to extend the East Wing of the White House is a permanent altering of the people’s house and an extension of the Trump brand…Mr. Trump is showing the world that his presidency is a royal court where a select few are invited to pledge their allegiance… Mr. Trump is refashioning the presidential residence into a palace; our democracy is now a members-only club.” (italics added) The headline of the article: “Trump’s Louis XIV Moment.”

References to Trump as a monarch are not only about his physically reworking the White House. On a more important political and legal note, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in her dissent in Court v. Trump (2024); “In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law.” And to underscore the monarchical imagery, the White House’s official Twitter account shared a doctored Time-like cover image of Trump with a golden crown.

The question of Trump chairing the Gaza Peace Board risks extending his monarchical self-image to the Middle East. The scope of Trump’s royal entry into foreign domains focuses on what exactly Trump’s 20 point peace plan says about his role as Chairman of the Board of Peace. As far as I can discern: As Chair, Trump would have oversight of several key functions:

+ Overseeing the redevelopment of Gaza

+ Overseeing the temporary transitional governance of Gaza (with a technocratic and apolitical Palestinian committee assisted by international experts)

+ Supervising until the Palestinian Authority (PA) has completed a reform program and is deemed capable of taking back control

In short: The Gaza Peace Board plan positions Trump in a central leadership and oversight role. But is this arrangement legitimate? Where does Trump’s authority come from? It should come from some form of treaty or international arrangement as well as the consent of the involved parties, not from royal benevolence. The simplest route to this legitimacy would be through a Security Council mandate. The U.N. Security Council has the power to establish binding transitional administrations.

As an example of a legitimate, successful U.N. transitional administration, Security Council Resolution 1272 (1999) established an organization with full responsibility for the administration of East Timor. The Resolution began: “Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, [the Council] decides to establish, as from the date of adoption of the present resolution, a United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET), which will be endowed with overall responsibility for the administration of East Timor and will be empowered to exercise all legislative and executive authority, including the administration of justice.”

Brazilian diplomat Sergio Vieira de Mello was designated to head the transitional organization. Officially, he was Special Representative of the. Secretary-General and Head of UNTAET. As such, he was empowered to legislate, administer justice, and command security forces. He was truly an all-powerful sovereign authority with 8,000 troops, 1,300 police officers, thousands of civilian personnel, and 200 military observers. As far as local consent, De Mello combined U.N. legal authority with the trust he gained with the Timorese people through empathetic, personal diplomacy.

And what a success! De Mello’s efforts as the de facto head of state led to the reconstruction of East Timor’s government institutions and public services, culminating in East Timor’s full independence in 2002.

But what happens when legitimacy is not clear? What happens when the question of legitimacy is challenged? That, unfortunately, is what happened in Iraq, also involving de Mello. Following the 2003 invasion of Iraq, U.N. Resolution 1483 (2003) acknowledged the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) as occupying power, led by the United States and the United Kingdom. The relationship between the CPA and the U.N. was never clear. De Mello had the title of Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Iraq and Head of the United Nations Mission in Iraq (UNAMI), but he had little deciding power. UNAMI was not UNTAET. The CPA dissolved in 2004; Iraq remains divided, with no clear peaceful governing structure.

Donald Trump’s monarchical delusions are dangerous enough within the United States; they should never be allowed to be projected internationally. The Gaza Peace Board needs a clear and legitimate mandate from the U.N. Although several states – such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Israel – have welcomed the Gaza Peace Board transition plan, including Trump’s chairmanship, it will fail like the CPA in Iraq unless it has full U.N. authorization.

The post As Chair of the Gaza Peace Board, “King Donald” Should Not Be Allowed to Expand His Domain appeared first on CounterPunch.org.

This content originally appeared on CounterPunch.org and was authored by Daniel Warner.

Print Share Comment Cite Upload Translate Updates

Leave a Reply Cancel reply