Trump’s UN Alternative Proposed

A new international governance initiative could challenge the UN’s authority, raising questions about its future role.

Story Overview

Trump proposes a “Board of Peace” as an alternative to the UN.
The Board seeks to redefine international conflict resolution.
Countries face pressure to align with either the UN or the Board.
Trump maintains support for the UN despite the new initiative.

Introducing the Board of Peace

President Donald Trump has announced the establishment of the “Board of Peace,” a proposed international body that could potentially serve as an alternative to the United Nations. The Board, unveiled in January 2026, aims to address global conflicts more effectively than existing multilateral institutions. However, this proposal has generated debate, as Trump simultaneously expressed continued support for the UN, highlighting a nuanced stance on international governance.

The Board of Peace, according to the White House, is designed to bring a more focused and transactional approach to peace-building efforts, particularly in regions like Gaza. Trump’s administration has emphasized the need for improved accountability and efficiency, which they argue the UN has failed to achieve. The Board’s first meeting is set to take place during the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

Stakeholder Dynamics

Trump has positioned himself as the potential lifelong chairman of the Board of Peace, solidifying his influence on the new entity’s direction. Other key figures include Jared Kushner and Marco Rubio, who are expected to play significant roles in diplomatic and strategic efforts. The Board’s membership is incentivized with a financial contribution model, where countries can secure permanent membership with a $1 billion investment, creating a hierarchy of influence based on financial power.

The establishment of the Board has prompted mixed reactions from international stakeholders. While some countries have received invitations, there is notable reluctance among these nations to publicly endorse the initiative. Vladimir Putin, for example, is reviewing the offer, potentially seeking concessions on issues like Ukrainian sanctions as part of participation negotiations.

Implications for International Order

The introduction of the Board of Peace challenges the traditional role of the UN, with implications for global governance structures. National security analyst Kobi Michael describes this as a significant shift from liberal multilateralism to a more interest-driven, transactional international order. The Board could set a precedent for alternative international bodies, potentially diminishing the UN’s authority in peace and conflict resolution.

The Board’s impact on Gaza reconstruction is particularly significant. It provides a dedicated mechanism for implementing Trump’s 20-point Gaza peace plan, offering a streamlined process compared to the often bureaucratic and slow-moving UN operations. This focus on efficiency and accountability may appeal to countries frustrated with traditional multilateral frameworks.