MOSCOW, January 20. /TASS/. US President Donald Trump’s proposed Board of Peace does not pose an existential threat to the United Nations, but it could undermine the organization’s authority and effectiveness, Nikolay Gaponenko, PhD in Economics and Associate Professor at the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, told TASS in an interview.
Several countries have reportedly received invitations from the United States to join the Board of Peace. It is expected to start active work during the second phase of the peace plan, which was agreed upon in October 2025 between Israel and Hamas, with mediation from Egypt, Qatar, the US, and Turkey. Russian Presidential Spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed that Russian President Vladimir Putin has been invited to join the Board regarding Gaza, and Moscow is currently exploring this possibility. Gaponenko emphasized that although the creation of the Board does not threaten the UN’s existence as an organization - which remains a cornerstone of the international system - it does pose a significant challenge to its authority and effectiveness.
The expert outlined three primary objectives behind Trump’s creation of this new international body. First, it serves as a strategic narrative - positioning Trump as a leader capable of resolving issues where he perceives the UN bureaucracy has become stagnant. Second, the initiative could be used as leverage to pressure the UN into reforms or shifts in policy. Third, from a political standpoint, it reinforces Trump’s image as a decisive leader proposing innovative solutions. Additionally, the new body offers a platform for negotiations in a more controlled and limited fashion, potentially excluding participants deemed undesirable by the initiators.
Gaponenko warned that such initiatives threaten to weaken the UN’s monopoly as the primary forum for conflict resolution. He highlighted several risks: the fragmentation of the international system through the formation of competing blocs, the erosion of multilateralism in favor of ad hoc agreements, and the gradual decline of international law if alternative structures bypass the UN Charter. While the Board of Peace is unlikely to replace the UN, its emergence reflects and intensifies a broader crisis of global governance, calling into question the central role traditionally played by universal institutions in world politics.