The European Union's executive arm, Russia, Belarus, and Thailand were the latest entities invited to join former U.S. President Donald Trump's proposed Board of Peace, intended to oversee the next phase of the Gaza peace plan. The invitations come as a top Israeli official voiced opposition to the initiative, deeming it detrimental to Israel's interests and advocating for its abandonment.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed that Russian President Vladimir Putin received the invitation. According to Peskov, the Kremlin is currently examining the details and will seek clarification on all aspects through discussions with the U.S. The Thai Foreign Ministry also acknowledged receiving an invitation and stated it is reviewing the details. Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko has been invited and is prepared to participate, according to the country's Foreign Ministry.

European Commission spokesperson Olof Gill confirmed that Ursula von der Leyen, president of the commission, received an invitation and would consult with other EU leaders regarding Gaza. Gill did not indicate whether the invitation would be accepted but affirmed the commission's desire to contribute to a comprehensive plan to resolve the Gaza conflict. The total number of invitees to the board remains unclear.

The concept of a "Board of Peace" introduces an element of algorithmic governance, where AI could potentially be used to analyze data, predict potential conflict triggers, and suggest diplomatic solutions. This approach reflects a growing trend of incorporating AI in international relations, although the extent of AI's role in this specific board remains undefined. Such applications of AI raise questions about transparency, bias, and accountability in international diplomacy. If AI algorithms are used to inform decisions, it is crucial to understand the data they are trained on and the potential biases they may perpetuate.

The invitation, according to sources familiar with the matter, included a reference to Trump, though the specific nature of the reference was not disclosed. The initiative faces skepticism, particularly from within Israel, highlighting the complexities of achieving consensus in the region. The Israeli official's criticism underscores the divergent perspectives on the path forward for Gaza and the challenges in gaining regional support for any peace plan.

The current status of the proposed board remains uncertain, pending responses from the invitees and further clarification on its mandate and operational structure. The coming weeks will likely see further discussions and negotiations as the involved parties weigh their options and consider the potential implications of participating in the initiative. The situation highlights the ongoing efforts to find a lasting resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the diverse approaches being explored.