President Donald Trump’s alternative to the United Nations is a very ambitious and global idea, the future of which is unclear. Will the body be in demand, functional, and effective? Will it be able to cope with the challenges and conflicts of our time? What are its real goals? It is difficult to give clear and precise answers to all these questions. However, it is very interesting to look at the reasons and motives for the accession to the Board of Peace of countries in Central and South Asia that are far removed from the United States and the conflict in Palestine. Many observers were surprised by the accession of Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, as well as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, to the new organization. What is this connected with, and what could it potentially give to these large and influential regional powers?
Donald Trump’s Board of Peace
The idea of the Board of Peace is a product of the peace plan for resolving the conflict in Gaza, put forward by the US president. The main author of the idea is said to be Jared Kushner, Donald Trump’s son-in-law and adviser on the Middle East. It all began in the summer of 2025. Several different groups—including the Institute for Global Change of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and independent experts—were simultaneously developing their own plans for ending the war in the Gaza Strip. During August–September, several projects were combined into one, which president Trump then presented as his peace plan. It envisioned, among other things, the temporary transfer of Gaza under international administration, namely a specially created body—the initial the Board of Peace, consisting of world leaders and diplomats.
But it is known that “appetite comes with eating.” Over time, the idea and scope of the Board of Peace expanded. Donald Trump directly acknowledged that he considers his Board of Peace a possible alternative to the UN. “The U.N. just hasn’t been very helpful. I’m a big fan of the U.N.’s potential, but it has never lived up to its potential. The U.N. should have settled every one of the wars that I settled. I never went to them. I never even thought to go to them,” Trump told reporters during a White House press briefing. It is worth noting the business-like approach reflected in the name of the new organization. Significantly, it does not use the word “council,” traditional for political bodies. Instead, it uses “board” (board of directors), which emphasizes that this is a body not for discussions but for making management decisions.
Ultimately, on January 22, 2026, a ceremony for signing the charter of the Board of Peace took place on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos. It was signed by the leaders and foreign ministers of 19 states, in addition to US President Donald Trump. The document was signed by the leaders and representatives of Azerbaijan, Argentina, Armenia, Bahrain, Bulgaria, Hungary, Indonesia, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Qatar, Morocco, Mongolia, the UAE, Pakistan, Paraguay, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Uzbekistan, and Kosovo.
Central Asia, Afghanistan, and the Board of Peace
The most significant interest in Eurasia was generated by the sudden accession of Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and, to some extent, Pakistan to Donald Trump’s initiative. Three large, influential, and relatively wealthy countries in the region joined the Board of Peace based on their national interests and the complex balance that exists today in Central and South Asia.
The Central Asian countries are balancing between security concerns and the need for economic dialogue with Afghanistan. The leading trend is the development of large infrastructure projects and local forms of economic interaction. After the Taliban’s victory and the withdrawal of US and NATO troops in August 2021, the situation in Afghanistan and the region as a whole underwent significant transformations. The danger of the spread and strengthening of international terrorism in the region increased. The Taliban generally take a rather lenient view of the activities of various terrorist groups on Afghan territory. There are no armed forces left that would be capable of resisting them on a permanent basis after the withdrawal of American and NATO troops. The Taliban themselves do not generally engage in spreading jihadism or supporting terrorist organizations, but they do allow various groups to move freely across their territory.
Thus, the main burden of potential and real threats from various international terrorist groups in Afghanistan falls on the countries of Central Asia, especially Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kazakhstan. A recent UN Security Council report speaks of an increase in the number of supporters of the terrorist group “ISIS-Khorasan” in Afghanistan. According to the UN, it consists of about two thousand militants. The group recruits both in Afghanistan and abroad, including in Central Asian countries and Pakistan.
Since the Taliban came to power, the situation in Afghanistan has stabilized. The level of military violence has decreased, but border clashes have become more frequent and bloody. For example, at the end of 2025, a series of armed incidents occurred on the borders of Central Asia. The last clash took place on December 24: two Tajik border guards and three Afghans were killed. Tajikistan has long opposed the rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan, a country with which it shares a largely unsecured 1,340 km (830-mile) border. In recent months, this has been the third case of an armed attack from the Afghan side.
It is also worth noting the rather fierce clashes on the Afghan–Pakistani border. Kabul accuses the Pakistani military of interfering in internal affairs and the unlawful use of military force. At the same time, Islamabad accuses the Afghans of supporting Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, a radical Islamist group that is waging an armed struggle against the Pakistani government. However, few observers deny the fact that Pakistani military circles have long been a key sponsor and mentor of various radical Islamist groups, including various factions of the Taliban.
In connection with potential threats and an attempt to establish closer relations with Donald Trump, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan decided to join the Board of Peace. Thus, Uzbekistan recognized Afghan threats as a security challenge. Tashkent identified the risks emanating from Afghanistan as one of the factors shaping its foreign policy. Uzbekistan’s decision to join the Board of Peace initiative was dictated precisely by the need to neutralize these cross-border threats. The adviser to the President of Uzbekistan, Abdulaziz Kamilov, directly linked instability in Afghanistan to the situation in the Middle East. He indicated that terrorist cells appeared in Afghanistan as a result of their “export” from the Middle East, creating a direct threat to the countries of Central Asia. In summary, it is worth noting that the Board of Peace is currently an organization that raises more questions than it provides answers. Each country joins it based on its own understanding of national interests and the need to maintain a positive relationship with Donald Trump. However, much remains unclear.
