A handful of Asian nations have agreed to sign up to US President Donald Trump's Board of Peace.
Initially pitched as a measure to resolve the conflict in Gaza, it's now expanded its remit to be a new global conflict-resolution platform.
Countries such as Indonesia and Vietnam have signalled support not because they expect the board to transform conditions on the ground in Gaza, analysts say, but because it could offer access to US trade.
Which Asian countries have joined?
Mongolia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Uzbekistan, Indonesia, Pakistan and Kazakhstan are among the 25 countries who have agreed to join so far.
Member states must pay $US1 billion ($1.4 billion) for a three-year term.
It has unclear how the board will function, how often it will meet and act.
Mr Trump retains final authority, a structure that some say signals the initiative is less about multilateral consensus.
Russia and China have been invited to join.
Both countries are veto-wielding members of the UN Security Council, frequently blocking resolutions that have increased tensions with Western nations.
What do Asian nations expect to get out of it?
Analysts say Asian countries are likely signing up as the global order feels increasingly fragmented.
"It's about relationships, leverage and reading the direction of US power," said the Lowy Institute's Susannah Patton.
Adrianus Harsawaskita, a foreign policy expert from Indonesia's Parahyangan Catholic University, told the ABC that Indonesia "needs an organisation that can take it to the next level".
"[Indonesia] needs an organisation that would make it appear international and … whether we like it or not, the Board of Peace, fits into the international category, albeit in a negative way," he said.
Mr Harsawaskita said Mr Trump saw Indonesia's membership in the board as a tool to increase US business interests in the country, which he said is now "too close to Beijing in the context of investment".
"I'm afraid this [the membership] is just an image, and has no real interest for the Indonesian public," he said.
Vahd Nabyl, the spokesperson of Indonesia's Foreign Ministry, told the ABC these allegations were incorrect.
"Indonesia's participation in the Board of Peace is not merely a formality," he said.
"It's a manifestation of its support for Palestine and a consistent commitment to supporting a just, sustainable peace process based on the principles of the two-state solution."
Indonesia's quiet shift to get noticed by Trump
While Jakarta has long presented itself as a principled, non-aligned actor — particularly on Middle East issues — Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto has gradually adopted a more US-friendly approach.
At the UN General Assembly in September, he called for stability and restraint in comments that marked a departure from the Muslim-majority country's past unequivocal support of Palestinian statehood.
"We must have an independent Palestine, but we must also recognise and guarantee the safety and security of Israel," he said.
He also flagged Indonesia's willingness to contribute troops to a potential stabilisation mission and to accept medical evacuees — steps that aligned closely with Western diplomatic language.
Later, Prabowo attended Mr Trump's peace summit in Egypt, and there were even rumours he might travel to Israel.
Mainstream Muslim organisations in Indonesia have not openly opposed Prabowo's decision, giving him space to manoeuvre despite criticism from foreign policy experts.
"I'm sorry to say, but Gaza is just an issue that is used [by Indonesia] as a political tactic, not as a serious issue that needs to be addressed," Mr Harsawaskita said.
"If Indonesia wanted to seriously address refugee issues and so on, it could've tackled the Myanmar case, the Rohingya refugees, which is right before our eyes," Mr Harsawaskita added.
Mr Nabyl said the accusation that Indonesia did not care about humanitarian issues is false.
"Participating in the Board of Peace and the Rohingya issue are two different things," he said.
Indonesia did not have many obvious ways to get the US interested, Ms Patton agreed.
"But its position as an influential Muslim-majority country gives it weight on this issue."
Fear of more tariffs
Experts say Vietnam is more exposed to US tariffs than Indonesia, and its decision to join the board is primarily about trade.
Hanoi's official announcement about joining framed the move as "strengthening cooperation with the United States".
For analyst Carlyle Thayer, an emeritus professor at UNSW, that framing of "cooperation" said everything.
"Once the invitation comes through, they immediately have to ask: what are the consequences if we don't accept?" Dr Thayer said.
"Going along with the flow for three years may be safer than antagonising Trump," he added.
He said for many countries, the calculation was less about enthusiasm and more about risk.
Cambodia, heavily dependent on garment exports to the US and already facing visa restrictions, is particularly wary of provoking Washington.
Vietnam, meanwhile, is balancing relations with both the US and China.
The US is its largest export market, leaving it more exposed than any other South-East Asian economy.
Unlike Indonesia, Vietnam has no strong domestic constituency focused on Middle East politics, making support for a Gaza-focused peace board uncontroversial domestically.
"If this helps get Trump's attention — or even a presidential visit — that's a win," Ms Patton said.
Maintaining US relations over principles
Analysts say interest in joining the board has come primarily from Asian governments already inclined to prioritise their bilateral relationship with Washington.
In Asia, this reflects a broader mood of pragmatism rather than nostalgia for the old international order.
"Many Asian leaders have been saying for some time that the old system is breaking down," Ms Patton said.
"The question is what replaces it."
While countries in the Global South often say they are dissatisfied with existing institutions because they feel under-represented, Mr Trump's proposal places the US even more firmly at the centre.
"That doesn't necessarily satisfy the Global South either," Ms Patton said.
China, for example, has quietly promoted alternative forums, including its International Organisation for Mediation (IOMED) — a technocratic, behind-the-scenes effort to shape how disputes are resolved.
Beijing's approach contrasts sharply with Mr Trump's characteristically loud diplomacy.
Ms Patton said we were likely to see competing institutions altogether.
She pointed to the way China and the US have approached regional conflicts — including between Thailand and Cambodia — with Beijing favouring behind-the-scenes engagement, and Washington opting for headline-grabbing interventions.
"The question," she said, "is which approach actually gains traction over time?"
Given the lack of process, structure and follow-through, some analysts believe the Board of Peace could simply fade away.
"In the Trump universe," Ms Patton said, "it's entirely possible that it blows up, or just disappears after a couple of years."
"In a [Middle-East conflict] region context, he's looking after his own interest in the name of Gaza, but internationally, I see this as part of the Trump Order," Mr Harsawaskita said.
The ABC approached the Cambodian and Vietnamese governments for comment.
