Listen to the article
President Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’ Initiative Faces Setbacks Amid Greenland Controversy
President Donald Trump’s ambitious plan to end the Israel-Hamas war through a new “Board of Peace” is encountering significant resistance following controversial moves regarding Venezuela and Greenland. What began as a promising diplomatic initiative endorsed by the UN Security Council has quickly become entangled in international tension and skepticism.
Trump started 2026 positioning himself as a “president of peace,” but his subsequent actions have undermined this image. In early January, he ordered a military operation to capture then-Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and threatened to use force to annex Greenland from Denmark, a NATO ally.
The planned unveiling of the Board of Peace at the World Economic Forum in Davos has now been thrown into uncertainty. Trump’s sudden threat to impose tariffs on European allies that supported Denmark, coupled with provocative social media posts about seizing Greenland, has alienated potential participants. In one particularly inflammatory message to Norway’s prime minister, Trump accused the Norwegian government of blocking the Nobel committee from awarding him the Peace Prize.
The diplomatic fallout has been swift. Despite sending over 60 invitations, fewer than 10 leaders have accepted positions on the Board of Peace, with several of these being described by critics as anti-democratic authoritarians. Notably absent are commitments from key European allies including Britain, France, and Germany.
“No to creating an organization as it has been presented, which would replace the United Nations,” stated French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot, reflecting widespread European concerns about the board’s purpose and composition. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer reportedly has reservations about the board’s membership, particularly the inclusion of Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping, and Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko.
The initiative has raised questions about Trump’s intentions regarding existing international institutions. At a White House news conference, Trump suggested the board “might” replace the United Nations, claiming, “The United Nations never helped me on one war.” He later added, “I believe you got to let the U.N. continue, because the potential is so great,” in what appeared to be an attempt to moderate his position.
On the Greenland issue, Trump adopted a somewhat less confrontational tone, stating, “I think that we will work something out where NATO is going to be very happy and where we’re going to be very happy.” However, when pressed on how far he would go to acquire the mineral-rich Arctic island, he responded cryptically: “You’ll find out.”
The situation has created a dilemma for White House officials, who are reportedly concerned about potential embarrassment for the president in Davos. Sources familiar with internal discussions indicate that advisers are scrambling to make the Board of Peace charter palatable to a wider array of leaders. One possibility being considered would have Trump sign the charter alone to establish the board, while delaying announcements on other members until later in January.
According to Matthew Schmidt, a defense expert at the University of New Haven, Trump’s approach to Greenland and the Board of Peace reflects his transactional view of foreign policy. “Donald Trump works in deals, and each deal is different and separate, and the point of each deal is to produce a win for Donald Trump,” Schmidt observed.
Schmidt also suggested that Trump appears motivated by a desire for control: “If he can’t run it, then he will look to replace it,” adding that the Board of Peace concept may have been “a fever dream” but is “completely unprecedented.”
The controversy threatens not only the Gaza ceasefire process but also potential U.S. initiatives to address the conflict in Ukraine, as European allies grow increasingly wary of Trump’s unpredictable foreign policy maneuvers. What began as a signature diplomatic initiative now risks becoming another flashpoint in the increasingly strained relationship between the United States and its traditional allies.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
14 Comments
The planned ‘Board of Peace’ initiative sounds promising, but its success will hinge on Trump’s ability to rebuild trust and bring all sides to the table. Antagonizing European allies over Greenland seems like an unnecessary distraction at a critical moment.
Agreed. Maintaining a delicate diplomatic balance will be essential. Trump needs to focus on the core peace plan and avoid getting sidetracked by unrelated disputes, even if they grab headlines.
This is a complex situation with a lot of moving parts. Bringing an end to the Israel-Hamas conflict would be a major diplomatic achievement, but Trump’s recent actions have raised concerns and skepticism among US allies. Maintaining a delicate balance will be crucial.
You make a good point. Trump’s impulsive style and tendency toward confrontation could jeopardize the peace plan if he can’t rein in his rhetoric and find common ground with key players.
Interesting development. Geopolitical tensions and conflicting priorities seem to be complicating the peace plan. I wonder how Trump plans to navigate these tricky diplomatic waters and get the key stakeholders on board.
Agreed, the Greenland controversy is likely distracting and undermining the broader peace initiative. Trump will need to tread carefully to avoid further alienating potential partners.
This is a complex geopolitical challenge with high stakes. Ending the Israel-Hamas conflict would be a major achievement, but Trump’s recent actions have created new obstacles. Careful diplomacy and compromise will be essential to keep the peace plan on track.
Absolutely. Trump’s impulsive style and willingness to antagonize allies could seriously undermine the peace initiative if he can’t rein in his approach. Maintaining stability and trust with key partners will be critical.
This is a complex geopolitical situation with high stakes. Ending the Israel-Hamas conflict would be a major diplomatic achievement, but Trump’s recent actions have created new obstacles. Careful navigation and compromise will be essential to keep the peace plan on track.
I agree. Trump’s brash style and willingness to escalate tensions with allies could seriously undermine the peace initiative. Maintaining stability and trust with key partners will be critical if he wants to broker a lasting ceasefire.
The proposed ‘Board of Peace’ plan is an ambitious goal, but the latest developments underscore the challenges of brokering a sustainable ceasefire in the region. Trump’s combative tactics towards US allies are particularly concerning and could jeopardize the entire initiative if he can’t find a more diplomatic approach.
Absolutely. Antagonizing Europe over Greenland seems like an unnecessary distraction that could derail the peace plan at a critical moment. Trump will need to demonstrate more finesse and restraint if he wants to bring all the key stakeholders together to reach a lasting agreement.
The proposed ‘Board of Peace’ plan sounds promising, but the latest developments underscore the challenges of brokering a lasting ceasefire in the region. Trump’s combative tactics towards US allies are particularly concerning and could jeopardize the entire initiative.
You make a good point. Antagonizing Europe over Greenland seems like an unnecessary distraction that could derail the peace plan. Trump will need to demonstrate more diplomatic finesse if he wants to bring all the key players on board.