US President Donald Trump's invitation to Thailand to join the Board of Peace (BOP) has elicited three distinct responses. The first two are succinct and clear in their rationale. The third, however, is more nuanced -- and notable for its ambivalence.
Last week, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) confirmed it had received Mr Trump's proposal to join the BOP, an initiative launched in September and linked to efforts to end the Gaza conflict and advance post-war stabilisation and development.
At the World Economic Forum in Davos last week, Mr Trump signed the BOP charter alongside leaders from about two dozen countries. From the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto and Vietnam's Deputy Prime Minister Bui Thanh Son attended and became founding members.
The MFA said Thailand welcomed initiatives that support lasting peace in the Middle East and humanitarian assistance for the Palestinian people, while reaffirming its support for a two-state solution in accordance with international law and relevant United Nations resolutions. It added that Thailand is currently studying the details of the invitation.
Among Thai officials, security circles, economists and the private sector, there is strong sentiment that the invitation presents an opportunity for Thailand to showcase its international standing and contribute to development in the Middle East.
Joining the BOP, supporters argue, would signal Thailand's willingness to promote peace and stability beyond Southeast Asia. Bangkok also hopes to advance issues related to the Palestinian cause.
The invitation comes amid improving Thai–US relations. US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs Michael DeSombre recently visited Bangkok, pledging US$68 million (2.1 billion baht) in foreign military financing and additional support for Thailand's efforts to combat online scams and strengthen Mekong cooperation.
In addition, the annual Cobra Gold military exercise -- the most important event in the Thai–US security calendar -- will take place late next month. The 45th iteration, the region's largest, will involve more than 8,000 troops from 30 countries.
Notably, some of the strongest support for joining the BOP has come from officials involved in labour and tourism. They stress that the Middle East is Thailand's largest overseas labour market and that Thailand's experience in tourism could help support Gaza's post-war recovery.
Thailand maintains close ties with both Israelis and Palestinians despite the ongoing conflict. It has long supported Palestinian self-determination and humanitarian relief, while also maintaining strong government-to-government and people-to-people relations with Israel.
Today, more than 60,000 Thai workers -- nearly double the number prior to the Oct 7, 2023, attack -- are employed in Israel's kibbutzim, mainly in agriculture and construction.
Although there is no deadline to respond to the US invitation, pressure is mounting, particularly as some Asean members have already joined the BOP. Asean foreign ministers are expected to exchange views on the initiative during their informal meeting on Jan 28–29 in Cebu.
However, detractors argue strongly against Thailand's participation, warning it could undermine the existing international order, particularly the United Nations.
They also caution against straining relations with Muslim-majority countries, mindful of sensitivities in southern Thailand. These critics emphasise that Thailand has long pursued a balanced approach towards Israel and Palestine.
They also point to Mr Trump's previous actions, noting that his administration has withdrawn from or disrupted relations with at least 66 UN-related and international organisations. Several Bangkok-based UN specialised agencies could be affected.
Some fear the BOP is intended as "new furniture" to replace the UN, as one veteran Thai diplomat put it. Although some BOP members describe the initiative as a new form of multilateralism, sceptics remain unconvinced.
Questions have also been raised about financial contributions. Some reports suggest membership is free for the first three years, but securing a permanent seat would require a US$1 billion contribution.
The board would be chaired by Mr Trump, potentially for life. Critics, therefore, view the BOP as more of a self-promotional project than a genuine global public good.
A third group favours a wait-and-see approach, believing the BOP will fail to gain long-term traction. Senior economists and diplomats in this camp urge Thailand to stay on the sidelines, arguing that initiatives challenging the post-World War II international system are unacceptable.
They are also betting on the outcome of the US midterm elections in November, which they expect to curb Mr Trump's influence.
Given Mr Trump's tendency to change course abruptly, critics argue the BOP may simply be another platform to showcase personal ambition. As such, they see little reason for Thailand to respond unless it seeks to curry favour.
For now, Thailand also faces domestic constraints. With a caretaker government in place amid campaigning for the Feb 8 election, it cannot commit to joining a new multilateral body. Any decision will fall to the next government. Thailand, therefore, is in no rush.
As one seasoned Thai diplomatic analyst put it, paraphrasing Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney: "If you are not on the table, you are on the menu." For now, Thailand is neither -- "we are still in the kitchen preparing the food."
