The board has failed to attract enthusiasm from most world leaders. with
Keir Starmer calling
Vladimir Putin's role "concerning". Some European Union ambassadors reportedly raised "serious doubts" and said that they would examine the legal framework before taking a position. He also remarked of
Emmanuel Macron, "Nobody wants him because he's going to be out of office very soon." A Canadian government source expressed to the media that Canada would not pay for a seat on Trump's proposed board of peace, adding that Prime Minister
Mark Carney intended to accept the invitation but not under the terms outlined by Trump. Finance Minister
François-Philippe Champagne later publicly confirmed that the federal government would not pay the "$1 billion US price tag." However, Trump rescinded Canada's invitation days after Carney
delivered a speech at Davos warning of an "era of great power rivalry" and arguing that the US-led world order had ended.
Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East said that Carney's participation would have conferred "undeserved legitimacy" on the board, adding that Canadians expected clear opposition to what it described as "Trump's power grab." Similarly, Brazil, under President
Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, viewed the proposal with caution, expressing concern that it could concentrate excessive power in the US presidency and overshadow the role of the UN. Norway too declined to join; its state secretary, Kristoffer Thoner, said the proposal "raises a number of questions that require further dialogue with the United States". Sweden did not issue a formal response but PM
Ulf Kristersson reportedly stated on the sidelines of the 2026
World Economic Forum that the country would not sign up to the board over its textual content. Italian Prime Minister
Giorgia Meloni said that participation in such a board would be incompatible with the country's constitution.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy expressed difficulty for Ukraine to join a board alongside Russia. UK Foreign Secretary
Yvette Cooper cited similar reason. German officials described the board as a "counter-draft" to the UN and were surprised that it proposed a permanent international organization to address global conflicts instead of focusing solely on a Gaza ceasefire.
The Guardian called it "a Trump-dominated pay-to-play club: a global version of his
Mar-a-Lago court aimed at supplanting the UN itself", arguing that the body ultimately outlined bore little resemblance to what the United Nations Security Council believed it was endorsing. According to
The Guardian, a charter circulated to national capitals two months after the resolution's adoption made no reference to Gaza, instead presenting the BoP as a permanent global institution. The article noted that most of the document focused on internal rules granting sweeping authority to the chairman
Donald Trump, the only individual namedincluding the exclusive power to appoint and dismiss members, set agendas, and issue resolutions, while other members could obtain permanent status only by paying a US$1 billion fee, still leaving effective control concentrated in Trump's hands.
Bloomberg described this as Trump holding the board's "ultimate decision-making power". Sania Faisal El-Husseini, a professor of international relations at the
Arab-American University in Palestine, noted that the organization "is not an international body with legal personality". Indonesian participation in the BoP was met with several protests at home. Former Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs
Dino Patti Djalal raised his skepticism on BoP's efforts to enforce peace with Palestine citing the lack of participation from Palestine and Trump's megalomaniacal attitude while recommending
Prabowo Subianto to keep an option for Indonesia to leave whenever the BoP violates Indonesia's free and active foreign policy. Djalal protested the planned deposit of US$1 billion as "nonsense" because it was far larger than Indonesia's funding to
ASEAN. After Prabowo summoned all foreign ministers and vice ministers, Islamic organizations and think tanks to clarify Indonesia's position, Djalal changed his opinion stating that BoP is the only "realistic" option while advising caution. Former minister
Hassan Wirajuda states that despite the worries that Trump may play a very unpredictable move, Wirajuda hoped that Indonesia along with the other Muslim majority countries inside the BoP can act as a counterbalance to Trump. Foreign Affairs Minister
Sugiono admits that Prabowo's decision to join the BoP will generate controversies, but these will diminish if everyone considers different perspectives.
Elon Musk questioned the BoP during remarks at the World Economic Forum, joking about the
homophony of "peace" and "piece" while referring to "a little piece of Greenland, a little piece of Venezuela", before adding that "all we want is peace."
Mary Robinson, a former chair of
The Elders, described the board as a "delusion of power" and said that its charter did not mention a UN mandate nor contain the word "Gaza", which had been the original mandate approved by the UN. At the
2026 Munich Security Conference, EU High Representative
Kaja Kallas said that the Board of Peace does not reflect the UN security council resolution, which "provided for a Board of Peace for Gaza, but it also provided for it to be limited in time until 2027, it provided for the Palestinians to have a say, and it referred to Gaza, whereas the statute of the Board of Peace makes no reference to any of these things". ==See also==