Replacing the UN? Trump goes too far
US President Donald Trump’s mafia-style intimidation, extortion and coercion are finally forcing countries to act, with traditional allies leading the revolt. Former journalist Goh Choon Kang explains why Trump’s Board of Peace has hit a dead end before it even takes off.
On 22 January, US President Trump announced the formal establishment of the “Board of Peace” (BoP) on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland — only for people to realise that it was not the Gaza peace panel originally proposed. The White House claimed it was an “international organisation” chaired by Trump himself. It was somewhat like a theatrical switcheroo.
A new corporate UN?
On 17 November last year, the United Nations (UN) Security Council adopted Resolution 2803, approving the US’s previously issued 20-point plan for a ceasefire in Gaza and post-conflict arrangements. The resolution authorised the establishment of a Board of Peace to oversee Gaza’s post-war transitional governance, with a mandate lasting until 31 December 2027.
Who would have thought that what Trump established turns out to be an “international organisation” that some have likened to a private club, with Trump as chair holding sole veto and appointment powers. Any country wishing to join as a permanent member must pay a US$1 billion fee. In Trump’s view, it seems anything can be turned into a money-making venture: Gaza could be run by the US and developed into a coastal resort, and the BoP could become a club charging exorbitant membership fees.
... preliminary indications suggest that Trump’s attempt at this “grand switcheroo” seems to have failed. All signs indicate that the allies he had belittled and mocked have finally reached their limit and collectively resisted.
And the most peculiar thing is that the board’s charter makes no mention of Gaza, instead taking a global perspective and even putting itself on par with the UN. One wonders what gives it such audacity. Some commentators believe the US aims to create a body parallel to the UN, which would further undermine the UN’s authority and functioning. But that might be giving Trump too much credit.
Other academics suggest that he is trying to build a corporate-style UN under his sole control — this seems closer to the truth.
However, preliminary indications suggest that Trump’s attempt at this “grand switcheroo” seems to have failed. All signs indicate that the allies he had belittled and mocked have finally reached their limit and collectively resisted. The White House had initially announced that around 50 countries were invited, including European nations, Russia, China, Canada and Singapore. In the end, only representatives from 19 countries showed up to sign the BoP’s charter. They were: Hungary, Argentina, Bahrain, Morocco, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Indonesia, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Pakistan, Paraguay, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the UAE, Uzbekistan and Mongolia. Even Kosovo, which is not internationally recognised, reportedly signed to make up the numbers.
None of the US’s European allies — the wealthy nations that could afford the US$1 billion fee — attended. For Trump, this must have been gravely embarrassing, a clear sign that he had hit a brick wall.
While the UN indeed has its flaws, it remains a legitimate international organisation recognised by the world — how could it be replaced by a private club?
Who calls the shots?
The committee Trump cobbled together is entirely different from the one authorised by the UN. Thus, all invited countries had every right to say no — it’s as simple as that. Most of them did, clearly having learned a painful lesson: they could no longer swallow insults and let themselves be exploited. Trump finally paid the price for his arrogance.
The other countries also seemed to have recognised reality, echoing what Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney had described: the world order is rupturing, and nations caught between great power struggles cannot simply comply anymore — they have options and can pool resources to chart new paths.
In fact, Europe should have severed its decades-long dependence on US protection long ago; instead, it failed to rise to the occasion, assuming it could remain indefinitely under America’s security umbrella.
Trump’s mafia-style intimidation, extortion and coercion are forcing countries to act. Leading the revolt are the US’s traditional allies. Other smaller nations also have ample reason to summon the courage to say no to Trump. While the UN indeed has its flaws, it remains a legitimate international organisation recognised by the world — how could it be replaced by a private club? The global multilateral system and international law cannot be left at the mercy of the so-called “King of Know-It-Alls”, Trump.
Put simply, he sets aside all agreements and picks them off one by one. ASEAN, in fact, was caught off guard by this very tactic.
ASEAN fell into his trap
This marks an important shift. After suffering under Trump’s tariff threats, countries have come to a clear understanding: they cannot repeat past mistakes and must seriously confront his “divide and conquer” strategy. His cunning lies in his ability to use “horizontal alliances” to undermine “vertical coalitions”. Put simply, he sets aside all agreements and picks them off one by one. ASEAN, in fact, was caught off guard by this very tactic.
After Trump announced “Liberation Day” tariffs, Vietnam was the first to rush to the White House, trying to get an early advantage by offering the US incentives — such as zero tariffs on American imports — to win Trump’s favour. Yet, it lost more than it gained in the end.
Indonesia and Malaysia also did the same. Yet, even more serious than the losses of individual countries was the breakdown of ASEAN’s collective bargaining. Each member began acting independently, hoping to reduce US tariffs through separate negotiations. But how can a sheep negotiate with a wolf alone?
In the end, they all fell into Trump’s trap, allowing his strategy to succeed completely. For countries around the world, this should have been a painful lesson — but ASEAN, it seems, learnt nothing.
Little reason to join Trump’s BoP
This time, Trump pulled a new trick with the BoP, inviting certain countries individually. Once again, some ASEAN members quickly fell into the trap, undermining ASEAN’s collective mechanism once more. This is truly worrying: is ASEAN’s unity and ability to act collectively gradually disappearing?
Indonesia was the first to join the board, with domestic opposition immediately emerging, worried that with many of the BoP’s details and mechanisms remaining unclear, hasty participation could leave Indonesia constrained by the US on future international agendas.
According to Indonesian media, Indonesian Foreign Minister Sugiono issued a video statement, reaffirming Indonesia’s support for the two-state solution. He said, “Palestinian independence and respect for Palestinian sovereignty are principles we have consistently upheld. The Board of Peace represents a concrete alternative at this time that we can hope will help realise these aspirations.”
As a private club, what role could it possibly play in promoting world peace? It remains a mystery how long it can even last.
From this, it seems the Indonesian government genuinely intends to help Gaza achieve peace. Yet the reality shows that Trump’s actions are like “Xiang Zhuang performing the sword dance, only so he could assassinate the Duke of Pei [Liu Bang]” — Gaza is merely a stepping stone.
Before departing for Davos, Trump held a one hour and 40 minute press conference at the White House on 20 January. According to reports, he hinted that the “Board of Peace” he proposed might replace the inefficient UN, while at the same time noting that the decades-old UN has the potential to assist his peacekeeping efforts. Such arrogance is astonishing. What merits close attention is how he intends to carry this farce forward. As a private club, what role could it possibly play in promoting world peace? It remains a mystery how long it can even last.
Singapore was also invited to join the BoP. In response to media queries on 20 January, Singapore’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that the government had indeed received an invitation from the US, but was still assessing it — in other words, no decision has yet been made.
Objectively speaking, there is little reason, either in principle or in law, for other countries to even consider joining such a baffling committee. Trump has no more than three years left as president — what sway will he have once his term ends?
This article was first published in Lianhe Zaobao as “特朗普偷天换日失手”.
