WASHINGTON – As U.S. President Donald Trump prepares to host the inaugural meeting of his “Board of Peace” in Washington on Thursday, a notable contingent of Southeast Asian leaders will be in attendance: Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto, Vietnam’s top leader To Lam and Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet. Their participation underscores a complex geopolitical calculation, as the board seeks to establish a framework for Gaza reconstruction and a broader international stabilization force, despite a conspicuous absence of traditional Western allies.
The inclusion of these three nations – Indonesia, Vietnam, and Cambodia – is particularly striking given that most other Southeast Asian countries are opting to remain on the sidelines. Indonesia’s involvement, in particular, has drawn significant domestic criticism, raising questions about President Prabowo’s foreign policy priorities and the potential ramifications for his administration. Critics within Indonesia have characterized the decision as rushed, lacking public and parliamentary consultation, and potentially favoring U.S. And Israeli interests, as reported by the ABC.
The Board of Peace’s primary focus at this initial meeting will be a reconstruction plan for Gaza and the formation of a Board of Peace-led International Stabilisation Force. While the specifics of these plans remain undisclosed, the very composition of the board – with key Western nations absent – signals a deliberate shift in Trump’s approach to international diplomacy. The board’s expanding charter is already being viewed by some analysts as a potential rival to the United Nations, a claim Trump himself seems to encourage, stating the board has “unlimited potential.”
Indonesia’s decision to engage with the board, despite internal opposition, appears to be driven by a desire to maintain a seat at the table in shaping global events, even if it means aligning with a controversial initiative. Prior to the meeting, Prabowo reportedly convened a group of former ministers, deputy foreign ministers, and senior diplomats at the Merdeka presidential palace in Jakarta, suggesting a concerted effort to assess the potential risks and rewards of participation. The domestic fallout from the meeting will likely be significant for Prabowo, making his actions and statements in Washington all the more crucial.
Vietnam’s participation, alongside Cambodia’s, suggests a broader trend of middle powers in Southeast Asia seeking to assert greater agency on the international stage. While the motivations behind Vietnam’s involvement are less publicly scrutinized than Indonesia’s, it reflects a willingness to engage with the Trump administration’s initiatives, potentially seeking economic or diplomatic advantages. The fact that only these three Southeast Asian nations are attending highlights a divergence within the region regarding engagement with the U.S. And its policies.
The meeting comes at a time of heightened geopolitical tension, with the conflict in Gaza remaining a central focus of international concern. Trump’s decision to invite leaders like Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and, previously, Vladimir Putin of Russia – both figures facing scrutiny from the International Criminal Court – has further complicated the board’s legitimacy in the eyes of some observers. While Putin has not formally accepted the invitation, Netanyahu’s presence, despite reservations about the inclusion of Turkish and Qatari officials, underscores the board’s unconventional and often polarizing nature.
The absence of traditional U.S. Allies from the Board of Peace raises questions about the future of American leadership and the potential for a fracturing of the international order. While Trump frames the board as a new and more effective mechanism for resolving global conflicts, critics argue that it is a divisive and ultimately counterproductive endeavor. The outcome of Thursday’s meeting, and the subsequent actions of the Board of Peace, will be closely watched by governments and businesses around the world, particularly those in Southeast Asia.
For Indonesia, the stakes are particularly high. The domestic criticism surrounding Prabowo’s decision to join the board will likely intensify if the outcomes of the meeting are perceived as unfavorable to Indonesian interests or if the board is seen as furthering U.S. Or Israeli agendas. The coming days will be a critical test of Prabowo’s leadership and his ability to navigate the complex geopolitical landscape.
The meeting also highlights the growing importance of Southeast Asia as a region of strategic significance. With its rapidly growing economies and increasing political influence, the region is attracting greater attention from both the U.S. And China. The divergent approaches of Indonesia, Vietnam, and Cambodia to the Board of Peace reflect the complex dynamics at play within the region and the challenges of forging a unified foreign policy stance.
As the Board of Peace prepares to unveil its plans for Gaza reconstruction and international stabilization, the world will be watching to see whether this unconventional initiative can deliver on its promises or whether it will further exacerbate existing tensions and divisions. The participation of Indonesia, Vietnam, and Cambodia represents a calculated gamble by these nations, one that could yield significant benefits or prove to be a costly misstep.
