The governments of Sweden, Finland, and Norway have officially declined to join the Board of Peace, a new international organization created by the president of the USA, Donald Trump, while Denmark did not even receive an invitation. As the board holds its inaugural meeting in Washington on February 19, 2026, the Nordic countries have chosen to boycott the initiative, attend strictly as observers, or remain excluded. The project was initially designed to manage the postwar transition in Gaza, but it has faced severe criticism from European governments for bypassing the United Nations (UN), lacking democratic transparency, and excluding Palestinian representation while welcoming authoritarian states.
A mechanism bypassing the United Nations
The Board of Peace was formally established during the World Economic Forum in Davos in January 2026. Initially, the UN Security Council authorized the body to oversee the reconstruction of Gaza and deploy a stabilization force following the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. However, the organization has rapidly expanded its scope, positioning itself as an alternative to the traditional multilateral system.
The founding charter grants exceptional powers to Donald Trump, who is designated as the chairman for life. He holds the sole authority to veto decisions, nominate successors, and control the agenda. Furthermore, permanent membership on the board requires a financial commitment of $1 billion (€925 million), a condition that critics describe as a transactional approach to international diplomacy.
Controversial members and exclusions
The composition of the Board of Peace is a primary source of diplomatic friction. The board includes Israel, but it does not feature any Palestinian representatives in its executive tier. This exclusion has raised significant doubts about the neutrality of the body in managing the transition toward a peaceful cohabitation in the Middle East.
Additionally, the membership list includes several non-democratic states. Countries such as Belarus have officially joined, while Russian President Vladimir Putin was invited, although he opted to skip the inaugural meeting. The presence of authoritarian governments, combined with the structural lack of multilateral oversight, has alienated traditional democratic allies of the USA.
The Nordic boycott and leaders’ statements
The Nordic countries have maintained a unified stance against the initiative, prioritizing international law and the established UN framework. In Sweden, Prime Minister (Statsminister) Ulf Kristersson clearly stated that the government will not participate under the current charter. He emphasized the necessity of a rules-based order, stating:
“We must stand firmly by the United Nations. Replacing a multilateral framework with a centralized, private initiative does not serve the cause of global stability.”
Similarly, the President of Finland (Suomen tasavallan presidentti), Alexander Stubb, confirmed that Helsinki will not join the board. Stubb noted that Finland will stick to a common European policy regarding the conflict and the peace process. Norway has also turned down the offer of full membership, choosing to send representatives to the Washington meeting solely as observers.
Denmark and the Greenland dispute
Denmark represents a unique case within the region, as the government in Copenhagen was explicitly excluded from the invitation list. This exclusion follows renewed diplomatic tensions with the USA after Donald Trump pressured the Danish government to give up its sovereignty over Greenland (Kalaallit Nunaat), a largely self-governing autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark.
Danish officials strongly rejected the American pressure, labeling the attempt to acquire the territory as “totally unacceptable” and warning against treating global territories as pieces in a geopolitical game. Consequently, the exclusion of Denmark from the Board of Peace underscores the personalistic and controversial nature of the organization. The selection of members confirms that participation depends entirely on the arbitrary preferences of the American president, rather than objective diplomatic criteria or strategic relevance.
The European Union’s divided stance
The controversy surrounding the board has also divided European countries. Major democratic states, including France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, have firmly rejected membership offers. They cited concerns over the lack of transparency and the aggressive marginalization of the United Nations.
Conversely, the European Union has opted for a cautious middle-ground approach. The European Commission announced it will not join as a member due to concerns about the governance of the board and its compatibility with the UN Charter. However, Brussels sent the European Commissioner for the Mediterranean, Dubravka Šuica, to attend the inaugural meeting strictly as an observer to monitor the developments regarding Gaza. Meanwhile, member states such as Hungary and Bulgaria broke ranks with the broader European consensus and officially joined the organization as full members.
