1. United States
2. N.Y.
3. Letter

I write in unequivocal opposition to President Donald Trump’s proposed “Board of Peace.” At a moment of profound devastation in the Gaza Strip, this proposal does not represent a credible path to peace. It represents a dangerous reframing of political dispossession and territorial ambition as economic opportunity. For over a year, Gaza has endured catastrophic civilian harm: mass casualties, large-scale destruction of housing and infrastructure, severe restrictions on food, fuel, water, and medical supplies, and repeated displacement of the civilian population. United Nations agencies, humanitarian organizations, and independent experts have documented widespread destruction and acute humanitarian collapse. Proceedings before the International Court of Justice have found a plausible risk of genocide and ordered provisional measures requiring Israel to prevent acts prohibited under the Genocide Convention and to ensure humanitarian access. Those proceedings are ongoing. Even in periods described as “ceasefire,” humanitarian access has remained fragile and insufficient relative to need. Famine warnings, medical system breakdown, and infrastructure collapse are not abstractions; they are documented realities. At the same time, senior members of Israel’s current governing coalition have publicly advocated annexation, permanent territorial control, and policies that would foreclose Palestinian statehood. Settlement expansion in the West Bank continues. These facts are widely reported and deeply concerning. Durable peace cannot emerge while territorial consolidation advances and civilian devastation persists. Against this backdrop, a “Board of Peace” that centers investment schemes, regional business integration, or externally designed governance frameworks — without full recognition of Palestinian self-determination and political sovereignty — risks functioning as a vehicle to normalize permanent subordination. Economic development cannot substitute for freedom. Reconstruction cannot substitute for rights. International law is clear. The Palestinian people possess the right to self-determination. The acquisition of territory by force is inadmissible. Collective punishment is prohibited. Civilians must be protected. Any U.S.-supported initiative must be grounded in these principles, not structured to bypass them. If this proposal aligns the United States more closely with the agenda of far-right factions in Israel that openly reject Palestinian statehood and equality, it will neither serve Palestinians nor Israelis who believe in democracy, human rights, and genuine security grounded in mutual recognition. Peace built on inequality is not peace; it is coercion. Congress must: • Oppose any mechanism that excludes legitimate Palestinian representation or predetermines outcomes that foreclose statehood. • Condition U.S. support on compliance with international humanitarian and human rights law. • Demand transparency regarding the legal authority, funding sources, and strategic objectives of this proposed body. • Reaffirm support for Palestinian self-determination, equal rights, and a viable, sovereign state. The United States cannot credibly advocate for international law in one context while disregarding it in another. Nor can it promote “peace” initiatives that entrench asymmetry and dispossession. A just resolution requires equality under the law, protection of civilians, accountability for violations, and recognition of Palestinian statehood and self-determination. Anything less is not peace — it is rebranding. I urge you to reject this proposal and to stand firmly for human rights, international law, and genuine self-determination for the Palestinian people.