Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1542865
Malta formally recognised the State of Palestine in September 2025, align- ing with the growing international consensus toward a two-state solution. Crucially, the US is not part of that consensus. This decision reflected Malta's com- mitment to established international law and the UN-backed framework for peace. Entering a body not explicitly dedicated to Palestinian statehood— and led by the United States, Israel's closest ally—risks undermining that alignment. Critically, the Board of Peace does not prioritise Palestinian statehood. Instead, it supports inter- im governance and reconstruction in Gaza, following a ceasefire—a different mission entirely. Moreover, the cease- fire agreement itself is heavily skewed in Israel's favour and risks legitimising the military occupation of a large part of the territory. Palestinians are not represented on the Board of Peace or the executive board. Palestinian participation is lim- ited to a subsidiary body with powers limited to overseeing reconstruction and administration in Gaza. In con- trast, Israel is a member of the board. The board's inclusion of prominent real estate developers, like Trump's former son-in-law Jared Kushner, who serves as a member of its exec- utive governing board, raises poten- tial conflicts of interest, as members could profit from reconstruction and development projects in the regions the board oversees. Joining could place Malta alongside actors whose agendas diverge sharply from its own policy on Palestinian self-determination. While a number of Arab and Mus- lim countries, including Pakistan and Turkey, have joined, they pursue their own regional interests, which may re- sult in unpleasant trade-offs typical in dealings between autocrats and dicta- tors who constitute the vast majority of members. 3. Constitutional neutrality Membership does not entail any mili- tary role, but the spirit of our constitu- tional neutrality could be undermined by subservience to US geopolitical interests formalised by the new struc- ture. Malta's neutrality is enshrined in its Constitution and remains a corner- stone of its foreign policy. While the board is not a military pact, partici- pation could signal alignment with a US-led geopolitical initiative increas- ingly viewed as polarising rather than stabilising. This is technically not in breach of our neutrality, but it could undermine its spirit. The board's evolving nature makes its future path uncertain. Initially limited to Gaza under a circumscribed UN Securi- ty Council mandate, analysts fear it could transform into a Pax America- na enforcer—a parallel structure that might supplant the UN. Membership positions Malta alongside states whose priorities may not respect sovereign decision-making, as seen in US inter- ventions in Venezuela and discussions about Greenland. This could blur Mal- ta's identity as a neutral actor; an hon- est broker. But this also raises a per- tinent question: What if the Board of Peace sets Malta on a collision course with other powers like China or oth- 6 maltatoday | WEDNESDAY • 28 JANUARY 2026 ANALYSIS < CONTINUES FROM PREVIOUS PAGE Why Malta's national interest is Even setting morality aside, there are several level-headed reasons based on the national interest why Malta should avoid joining this farce A crowd of protestors gathered in Castille Square after marching through Valletta (Photo: Miguela Xuereb/Newsbook) US President Donald Trump at the first Annual meeting of The Board of Peace (Photo: White House, US)