U.S. President Donald Trump has launched a new initiative called the Board of Peace, inviting numerous global leaders to participate in an effort to resolve ongoing conflicts worldwide. However, this initiative has raised concerns among diplomats who fear it could undermine the role of the United Nations in international peacekeeping.
The idea for the Board of Peace was introduced last September as part of Trump’s strategy to end the conflict in Gaza. The initiative has since expanded its focus to include various global disputes. The board is set to be chaired by Trump himself, and its main objective includes promoting global peace and addressing conflicts. According to a draft charter, membership would typically last three years, but countries could become permanent members by contributing $1 billion to the board’s operations.
So far, about 35 world leaders have accepted Trump’s invitation out of more than 50 invitations extended, including partners from the Middle East such as Israel, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar, and Egypt. NATO members Turkey and Hungary, as well as countries like Morocco, Pakistan, Indonesia, Kosovo, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Paraguay, and Vietnam have also agreed to participate. Notably, Belarus has accepted the invitation, a move seen as controversial due to its government’s historical human rights violations and support for Russia’s actions in Ukraine.
Despite these commitments, some traditional U.S. allies are hesitant. Norway and Sweden have declined the invitation, citing reservations about Trump’s approach to international relations. Italy’s Economy Minister expressed concern over constitutional implications of joining a board led by a single country. France has also indicated it will decline, and Canada has agreed in principle but is still negotiating terms. Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom have not publicly defined their stances yet, while Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy expressed difficulty in imagining collaboration with Russia after years of conflict.
Trump has dismissed concerns that the Board of Peace might overshadow the UN, arguing that the organization should continue its work due to its potential. The UN Security Council recently authorized the board’s existence focused solely on Gaza, which was met with abstentions from Russia and China, both concerned that the resolution did not involve the UN’s role.
The legal authority and functional scope of the Board of Peace remain ambiguous. Its charter grants Trump considerable executive powers, including vetoing decisions and expelling members. While it operates under the framework of international law, the specifics of how it will interact with the UN and other organizations are still unclear.
This initiative highlights Trump’s ongoing efforts to reshape international diplomacy, albeit amid significant skepticism and mixed responses from across the globe. As the Board of Peace moves forward, it may redefine certain elements of international cooperation while simultaneously challenging the established norms represented by the United Nations.