taz: The charter of US President Trump’s “Peace Council” has just become public. Were you shocked?
Eliav Lieblich: I had already heard rumors in recent days that the powers of the Peace Council would go beyond the mandate provided for in the Security Council resolution with regard to Gaza and that the council Rather, I want to challenge the UN as the leading forum for international peace and security issues. Still, I was surprised when I read the charter: it doesn’t even mention Gaza. The Charter is clearly intended as a challenge to the UN and as a sign of distrust towards this organization.
taz: To what extent?
Lovely: Most international agreements dealing with international peace and security refer to and reaffirm the UN Charter. This charter does not do that. It does mention international law at one point, but only vaguely and probably only to allay the concerns of potential member states. Looking at the preamble, it is clear that the aim is to portray the UN as ineffective and to imply that it needs to be replaced. Lasting peace, it says, requires “the courage to break with approaches and institutions that have all too often failed.” This is a direct challenge.
The rest of the text of the charter also reads quite scary.
Lovely: Yes, the council works in a very strange way. It is structured around a chairman: Donald J. Trump – not necessarily in his capacity as President of the United States, but personally – and it is potentially a chairmanship for life, according to Article 3 of the Charter. Whether someone is accepted as a member depends on whether Trump invites someone to join. The Peace Council is in some ways comparable to the idea of a “League of Democracies” that has been circulating in certain circles in the USA for decades. This league is intended to be a replacement for the UN, but only with like-minded democracies. The Peace Council is based on the same idea, except that democracies are replaced by states that are willing to do whatever Donald Trump wants. He invites the members. He appoints the board. He can block decisions of the member states, the Peace Council and the Executive Board with his veto. It would be amusing if we weren’t at such a worrying turning point in the world today.
taz: The UN Security Council has passed a resolution in November 2025which welcomed the establishment of a peace council under Trump. However, it was not clear that the Peace Council would have such an orientation.
Lovely: Yes, the Security Council approved the Peace Council – mind you, for the operation in Gaza, not so that it could establish a new international security mechanism.
I therefore do not believe that the extraordinary powers given to the Peace Council in relation to Gaza can be extended to other matters. Perhaps Trump and his allies will argue that the Security Council has implicitly authorized such powers for use elsewhere. To me that would be a very weak argument, but we have also seen weak arguments regarding Venezuela and Greenland, so it wouldn’t surprise me if we heard strange interpretations on this topic too.
Could the UN Peace Council actually become dangerous?
Lovely: Formally speaking, the Charter of the Peace Council cannot replace the Charter of the United Nations. Article 103 of the United Nations Charter states that no subsequent international agreement shall contravene the provisions of the Charter. This means that the Peace Council is also subject to international law as set out in the Charter of the United Nations. However, it is clear that Trump and his administration do not particularly respect existing international agreements – they have publicly stated this and have already withdrawn from many organizations – and are doing a lot to undermine them. If someone now argues that the Peace Council was approved by the UN Security Council and should replace it, that would be a kind of Frankenstein situation: the UN Security Council has created a monster that returns and devours its creator.
What determines how powerful the Council becomes?
Lovely: According to the Charter, the Peace Council comes into force once three states have joined it. Normally, a much larger number of states are required to create an international organization. So that’s pretty unusual. The real question now, however, is how many states will actually join the Council. Many will likely be hesitant because they would be joining an organization that is under very authoritarian control from Donald Trump. However, if many join, it could actually become a challenge for the UN.
Gaza is not mentioned in the charter. Have In the end, the Charter and the Board of Peace are none at all Consequences for the coastal strip?
Lovely: Yes, they have. It would mean that Trump is overseeing the entire mechanism. If this peace council holds true in Gaza, Trump would have the final say on all matters.