New Delhi | January 29, 2026, 11:58 a.m. (IST)
Trump’s Board of Peace faces global backlash as US allies reject the plan and world leaders warn it threatens United Nations authority and multilateral order.
Key Highlights
- Major US allies including France, Germany, UK, and Spain reject Trump’s Board of Peace
- Leaders warn the initiative weakens United Nations authority and multilateral norms
- Charter provisions raise fears of a pay to play global security model
- UN Secretary General asserts Security Council’s exclusive mandate on peace and security
President Donald Trump’s newly announced Board of Peace has triggered a wave of international resistance, with several major US allies refusing to participate and global leaders warning that the initiative threatens the authority of the United Nations. What was introduced as a mechanism to oversee Gaza’s post war transition is now being widely viewed as a broader challenge to the existing multilateral world order.
The proposal was unveiled by Trump at the World Economic Forum in Davos on January 22. While the White House presented the board as a flexible peace management body, critics argue it risks undermining the UN Security Council by creating a parallel power structure dominated by Washington.
Europe Leads Rejection of Trump’s Board of Peace
Opposition has been most visible across Europe. France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and Spain formally declined invitations to join the board. Croatia added its voice on Wednesday, with Prime Minister Andrej Plenković confirming that Zagreb had carefully examined the proposal and found multiple concerns.
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz stated that Germany could not participate due to constitutional constraints linked to the board’s structure and decision making process.
Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni raised similar issues, noting that Italian law requires equal standing and transparency in international governance arrangements.
European Council President Antonio Costa echoed these concerns, highlighting uncertainty over the board’s legal scope, governance framework, and compatibility with the UN Charter. European officials fear that the initiative sets a precedent that weakens collective global decision making.
Top News: Trump’s Board of Peace Explained: How the $1 Billion Body Aims to Reshape Gaza and Global Stability
Lula and Macron Defend United Nations Supremacy
Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and French President Emmanuel Macron coordinated their opposition during a phone call earlier this week. Both leaders emphasized that global peace initiatives must operate strictly within the framework of the United Nations and under the authority of the UN Security Council.
Lula also raised concerns directly with Trump during a call on Monday. He urged the US president to restrict the board’s mandate exclusively to Gaza and proposed adding formal Palestinian representation. Brazilian officials remain wary that Trump’s broader ambition is to establish a US controlled alternative to the UN system.
Their stance received strong backing from UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres. Speaking at the Security Council on January 26, Guterres reaffirmed that the council holds the sole Charter based authority over international peace and security. He stressed that no external body has the legal power to impose binding decisions on sovereign states.
Charter Provisions Spark Pay to Play Fears
Much of the controversy stems from the board’s 11 page charter, which outlines a system of permanent membership tied to financial contributions. Countries seeking permanent seats are required to commit at least $1 billion, prompting critics to describe the model as a pay to play version of the UN Security Council.
The charter grants Trump extensive powers as chairman, including veto authority, membership approvals, and agenda control. While UN Resolution 2803 authorized a transitional governance framework for Gaza until 2027, the charter notably makes no specific reference to Gaza.
Trump further intensified concerns at Davos when he stated that once fully established, the board could “do pretty much whatever we want.” Diplomats argue that such remarks reinforce fears of unchecked executive control over international peace initiatives.
Supporters and Strategic Implications
Despite widespread criticism, several countries have agreed to participate. Hungary, Argentina, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Morocco, Indonesia, and Belarus have confirmed involvement. Belarus joined on Wednesday despite facing ongoing Western sanctions.
Canada was initially invited but later excluded after Prime Minister Mark Carney warned at Davos that the board could destabilize the global order and weaken multilateral institutions.
International relations experts see the initiative as a sharp test of alliance cohesion. Diao Daming, a professor at Renmin University of China, described the board as an assertion of US hegemony that violates principles of equality and fairness in global governance.
A Defining Moment for Multilateral Order
As resistance grows, Trump’s Board of Peace has become a focal point in the wider debate over the future of international cooperation. The initiative underscores deep divisions between US led unilateral approaches and the rules based system anchored by the United Nations.
Whether diplomatic pressure forces revisions to the board’s structure or additional nations choose to join will shape its long term relevance. For now, the backlash signals that much of the world remains committed to preserving the UN’s central role in global peace and security.
Top News: USS Abraham Lincoln Deployment Fuels Iran War Fears After US Warning to Tehran
