Trump’s broad ambitions for the Peace Council spark new support for the United Nations

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — President Donald Trump’s latest attempt to bypass the United Nations through his new Peace Council appears to have backfired after major world powers rejected U.S. aspirations for a broader international mandate beyond the Gaza ceasefire and recommitted their support to the 80-year-old global institution.

The council to be chaired by Trump was originally conceived as a small group of world leaders overseeing his plan for the future of Gaza. But the Republican president’s ambitions extended to portraying the council as a mediator of world conflicts, a not-so-subtle attempt to eclipse the Security Council, which is charged with ensuring international peace and security.

The council’s charter has also caused some consternation, stating that Trump will lead it until he resigns, with veto power over its actions and membership.

His secretary of state, Marco Rubio, tried to allay concerns by saying that right now the board is focused only on the next phases of the Gaza ceasefire plan.

“This is not a replacement for the U.N., but the U.N. has done very little in the case of Gaza, other than food aid,” Rubio told a congressional hearing Wednesday.

But Trump’s promotion of an expanded mandate and endorsement of the idea that the Peace Council “could” replace the UN have put off key players and been dismissed by UN officials.

“In my view, the basic responsibility for international peace and security rests with the UN, rests with the Security Council,” Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said on Thursday. “Only the Security Council can make decisions binding on all, and no other body or coalition can be legally bound to compel all member states to comply with decisions on peace and security.”

In Security Council statements, public speeches and behind closed doors, US allies and adversaries have rejected Trump’s latest plan to overturn the post-World War II international order with what he describes as a “bold new approach to global conflict resolution”.

“The US development of the much broader Peace Council charter has turned the whole exercise into a liability,” according to Richard Gowan, UN observer and program director at the International Crisis Group. “The countries that wanted to sign up to help Gaza saw the governing council turn into a Trump fan club. It was not attractive.”

“If Trump had kept the board’s focus on Gaza alone, more states, including more Europeans, would have signed up,” he said.

Key members of the Security Council did not sign

The other four veto-wielding members of the Security Council — China, France, Russia and the United Kingdom — have declined or not indicated whether they will join Trump’s council, as have economic powers such as Japan and Germany.

Letters sent this month inviting various world leaders to be “founding members” of the Peace Council coincided with Trump’s vow to seize Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory of NATO ally Denmark, and punish some European countries that resisted. That was met with sharp pushback from Canada, Denmark and others, who said Trump’s request threatened to upend an alliance that had been among the West’s staunchest.

Shortly after, Trump made a dramatic reversal on Greenland, saying he had agreed with NATO’s secretary general on a “framework for a future agreement” on Arctic security.

Amid the diplomatic chaos, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who at the time had not responded to an invitation from Trump’s Peace Council, met with Guterres in London and reiterated the UK’s “enduring support for the UN and the rules-based international system,” according to a statement.

Starmer emphasized the UN’s “crucial role in tackling global issues that shape lives in the UK and around the world”. The United Kingdom later refused to join the board.

France, Spain and Slovenia rejected Trump’s offer citing his overlapping and potentially conflicting agenda with the UN.

French President Emmanuel Macron said last week that the board goes beyond the “Gaza framework and raises serious questions, especially about the principles and structure of the United Nations, which cannot be questioned.”

Spain did not join because the council excluded the Palestinian Authority and because the body was “outside the United Nations,” Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez said.

Some countries are calling for a stronger UN

America’s adversaries also bypassed the board.

“No single country should dictate terms based on its power, and a winner-takes-all approach is unacceptable,” China’s UN ambassador Fu Cong told a Security Council meeting on Monday.

He called for the United Nations to be strengthened, not weakened, and said the status and role of the Security Council “are irreplaceable.”

In a clear reference to the Peace Council, Fu said: “We will not pick and choose our commitments to the organization, nor will we bypass the UN or create alternative mechanisms.”

So far, about 26 of the 60 invited countries have joined the board, and about nine European countries have declined. India did not attend Trump’s signing ceremony at the World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, Switzerland, last week, but is apparently still deciding what to do. Trump revoked Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s invitation.

“It is hardly surprising that very few governments want to join Trump’s UN, which so far looks more like a paid club for human rights abusers and suspected war criminals than a serious international organization,” said Louis Charbonneau, UN director of Human Rights Watch. “Instead of handing Trump $1 billion checks to join his Peace Council, governments should be working to strengthen the UN”

Eight Muslim nations that agreed to join the board issued a joint statement supporting its mission in Gaza and the promotion of Palestinian statehood. Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Indonesia, Pakistan, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates made no mention of Trump’s global peace plan.

The Crisis Group’s Gowan said their focus could be a way to “get a foothold in the Gaza talks” early on, as Trump’s cease-fire plan has already faced several setbacks.

“I remain unconvinced that this is a real long-term threat to the UN,” Gowan said.

Leave a Comment