The Board of Peace (BOP), an initiative created by US President Donald Trump, is reportedly facing a potential collapse after donor funds expected to finance its operations failed to materialise, leaving its cash reserves empty months after its establishment.
The project was initially presented as a large-scale international effort, with Trump previously announcing expectations of up to $17 billion in contributions from participating countries, equivalent to approximately Rp303 trillion. However, no significant financial inflows have been recorded to date, raising doubts over the viability of the initiative.
Critics have increasingly questioned the purpose of the Board of Peace, with some describing it as a politically driven project rather than a genuine humanitarian mechanism aimed at addressing the situation in Gaza.
According to a report by the Financial Times, cited by Middle East Monitor, the World Bank—designated as the financial administrator for the fund—has not received any donor contributions in the four months since the board was created.
A person familiar with the matter was quoted as saying bluntly that “zero dollars have been deposited,” underscoring the scale of the funding shortfall.
The lack of financial delivery comes despite earlier commitments from member states totaling around $7 billion in a proposed “aid package” for Gaza, alongside an additional $10 billion pledge reportedly promised by Trump’s administration.
Instead of being channelled through the World Bank’s standard mechanisms, which operate under United Nations oversight and require formal reporting obligations, contributions are reported to have been routed through a JPMorgan-linked account structure.
This alternative arrangement has triggered concerns among observers and financial governance experts, particularly due to the absence of independent oversight and unclear reporting standards associated with private banking channels.
An anonymous Board of Peace official told the Financial Times that “several options were set out for receiving funding” and that donors had opted for “alternative arrangements” rather than the World Bank-managed structure.
The official added that the board would eventually report its finances to its own executive council, which includes officials and advisers from the Trump administration, “at a time deemed appropriate.”
Despite the broader funding uncertainty, some limited contributions have been recorded. Morocco reportedly pledged $20 million, which was used to support the office of Nickolay Mladenov, the board’s “high representative” for post-war Gaza affairs, as well as salaries for a Palestinian technocratic committee tasked with managing administrative functions in the territory.
Separately, a $100 million pledge from the United Arab Emirates intended to train a new Gaza police force has not yet been utilised. The programme has not officially begun, and the funds remain frozen pending further implementation steps.
Meanwhile, a senior congressional aide said that no funds have been transferred directly to the Board of Peace and stressed that there is currently “no intention” for the body to manage financial resources independently.
An additional $50 million allocation intended to support the board’s operational costs has also not been disbursed, pending the establishment of financial controls and systems required for handling US government-linked funding.
The ongoing uncertainty surrounding the Board of Peace has intensified scrutiny over its structure, governance, and financial transparency, with analysts warning that the absence of clear funding mechanisms could undermine the initiative’s credibility and long-term sustainability.
