"As long as we stand united, we can... end decades of suffering, stop generations of hatred and bloodshed, and create a beautiful, eternal, and glorious peace for the region, and even for the entire world."
This was the bold declaration by U.S. President Donald Trump this week at the Davos Forum when he unveiled his newly established "Board of Peace."
The war-torn and conflict-ridden world would like to believe him.
Yet, for many observers and officials around the world, this is more evidence that Trump is trying to dismantle the post-war international order and replace it with institutions led by himself.
"We will not be played," warned Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk on social media coldly.
However, Viktor Orbán, Trump's biggest supporter in Europe, gave a warm endorsement: "If it's Trump, there will be peace."
What will this committee, permanently led by Trump himself, do? Is this really an attempt to establish a "mini United Nations"?
The Power of the Committee Chairman
The idea initially emerged from last year's U.S.-led effort to end the Gaza war, backed by a UN Security Council resolution, and now has become more ambitious, broader, and more global. Its core remains the U.S. president himself.
According to leaked draft charter documents, he will serve as the "lifetime chairman" of the committee, even after leaving the presidency. According to the charter, his powers are immense: he can invite or reject members, establish or dissolve affiliated bodies, and appoint his successor if he resigns or becomes incapacitated.
Any country wishing to become a permanent member must pay a staggering $1 billion (approximately £740 million).
This explosive news comes amid a month already filled with dramatic events: within a few weeks, the U.S. arrested a Venezuelan leader, Trump threatened and prepared for military action against Iran, and he demanded to buy Greenland, causing shock across Europe and the world.
Nineteen countries attended the committee's unveiling ceremony in Davos, ranging from Argentina to Azerbaijan, former Soviet republics to Gulf kingdoms. It is said that more countries have "agreed to join."
"I like every member of this group," Trump smiled at the leaders and officials now part of the committee and its multi-tiered administrative structure.
But there are also more potential members who have politely declined.
British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper explained, "This is not just a treaty; it involves broader issues, and we have concerns about Putin's involvement in an institution discussing peace."
Trump stated that Russia had joined, but Moscow claims it is still a "consultative partner."
Sweden simply responded, "We will not join with the current text."
Norway's diplomatic language was, "This proposal still has many unresolved issues and requires further dialogue with Washington."
Even seven Muslim-majority countries (including six Arab states and Turkey, Indonesia) have indicated they are joining only to promote "just and lasting peace in Gaza," including rebuilding this devastated region.
Yet, the leaked draft charter contains no mention of Gaza.
For some critics - including some hesitant countries - this is a self-promotion plan designed by Trump to pursue his unhidden goal - the Nobel Peace Prize, which Obama won during his first term in 2009.
World leaders are also clear: not joining this new club may come at a cost.
"He will join if I impose 200% tariffs on his wine and champagne, but he doesn't have to join," Trump threatened French President Emmanuel Macron, brandishing his favorite weapon: tariffs.
Only Slovenia voiced what everyone was thinking. Prime Minister Robert Golob clearly stated that this "would dangerously interfere with the broader international order."
Trump directly responded to this concern.
"Once this committee is fully formed, we can basically do anything we want, and we will do it together with the United Nations," Trump's voice echoed in the packed hall.
However, he still likes to keep the world guessing.
The day before, a Fox TV reporter asked him whether the council would replace the United Nations. He answered, "Well, possibly. The United Nations isn't very helpful."
Then he added, "I have great confidence in the potential of the United Nations, but it has never realized that potential. The United Nations should have resolved every war I have resolved."
A New 'Chief Peacemaker'?
The United Nations, an organization with 193 members, has indeed lost its role as the "chief peacemaker."
In October 2016, I interviewed António Guterres on the day he became secretary-general. Earlier that day, the Security Council had unusually unanimously supported him. He then promised to "start a wave of diplomacy for peace."
Yet over the past decade, the United Nations has faced repeated obstacles: a paralyzed Security Council, actors and state supporters fueling wars in various regions, and the declining status of the United Nations in the face of powerful world powers.
Senior UN official Martin Griffiths said, "We all must welcome Trump's positive efforts in ending wars." He believed this new initiative "clearly reflects the failure of the Security Council and the entire United Nations."
But this former Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs also warned, "Over the past 80 years, we have learned the importance of inclusiveness and representing the global community, not just Mr. Trump's friends."
Secretary-General Guterres himself recently lamented, "Some believe that the power of law should be replaced by the rule of power."
In a BBC Today program interview, when asked about Trump's repeated claim that he "ended eight wars," Guterres calmly replied, "Those were only ceasefires."
Some of them have since broken down.
The temporary peace agreement between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo collapsed soon after; Cambodia and Thailand began accusing each other and crossing borders; India questioned Trump's central role in the India-Pakistan conflict.
But only Trump's strong mediation could end the 12-day war between Iran and Israel.
He personally intervened in the devastating conflict in Gaza last October, facilitating a ceasefire that eased the suffering of Palestinians and the grief of Israeli hostages' families. His determination to focus on this disaster was partly driven by the urging of Arab allies and the families of Israeli victims, and he pressured Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and Hamas to reach an agreement.
Now, as the committee begins to take shape, its members include both Netanyahu, who firmly opposes Palestinian statehood, and Arab leaders who insist that the only path to peace is Palestinian self-rule and the end of Israeli occupation. The first test facing the committee – advancing the Gaza war from a preliminary agreement to a genuine end – remains daunting.
Another major war of concern to the U.S. and Europe is Ukraine. President Zelenskyy strongly opposed talks with Russia and Belarus at the same table.
The committee has three levels of institutions, most focused on Gaza: the Executive Committee, the Gaza Executive Committee, and the Gaza National Administration Committee.
They bring together high-level U.S. officials and billionaires, familiar former political figures and former UN envoys, and Arab ministers, intelligence chiefs, and Palestinian technocrats.
Even some critics acknowledge that Trump has brought another long-standing battle to the forefront – the need for reform of the post-war UN structure, including the Security Council, which has long ceased to reflect the current global political landscape. It is completely outdated.
Former UN Deputy Secretary-General Mark Malloch Brown reflected, "Perhaps one unexpected benefit of Trump's actions is bringing these issues back to the forefront of the international agenda."
"We are emerging from a period of extremely weak UN leadership, and this might be a call to action."
Ironically, as Trump boasts of being a global peacemaker, discussions are actively taking place around the world to replace Guterres, whose second term ends this year.
This U.S. president, who once claimed he could end the war in Ukraine "in a day," now deeply realizes that peace mediation is a long and dangerous process.
Yet today, he claims that the Middle East now only has "small sparks"; he promises that the issue of Ukraine will be resolved "very quickly."
And he is immersed in his new role as a potential "chief peacemaker."
"This is for the whole world," he shouted loudly.
Source: BBC
Original: toutiao.com/article/7598617038114652723/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author.