• Trump's Board of Peace sees divisions among European nations while garnering support from Muslim-majority countries.
• Norway, Sweden, France, and other Western nations decline to join over concerns it may undermine the UN.
• Approximately 30 out of 50 invited countries are expected to join the board, led by Israel and several Arab states.
• Trump suggested the board could eventually rival the UN's role in global conflict resolution.
• Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s decision to join marks a shift from previous criticisms of the board's structure.

Following the launch of U.S. President Donald Trump’s Board of Peace, significant divisions have emerged among European nations regarding participation, with some countries declining invites and others remaining noncommittal. Norway, Sweden, and France explicitly rejected their invitations, expressing concern that the board could undermine the United Nations' established role in mediating global conflicts. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot emphasized that while France supports the Gaza peace plan, it does not endorse a new organization that may supplant the UN, according to Latimes and South China Morning Post.

In stark contrast to Western hesitations, a group of Muslim-majority countries, including Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan, and the United Arab Emirates, have agreed to join the Board of Peace. This has led to a discussion on the board's potential role beyond Gaza, which initially sparked its creation. A White House official mentioned about 30 countries are expected to join, while roughly 50 had been invited, as reported by Channel News Asia and Latimes.

During the official unveiling of the board at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Trump indicated that the body is intended to be for global benefit. He stated, “this isn’t the United States, this is for the world,” and hinted at ambitions for the board to assume functions similar to those of the UN. Trump suggested that the organization might even replace certain UN functions in the future. This assertion raised eyebrows regarding the legitimacy and scope of the board, as discussed by South China Morning Post and Channel News Asia.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's agreement to participate represents a shift in sentiment, as he had previously criticized the board’s composition. However, Netanyahu's collaboration with leaders from various nations, some considered controversial, continues to generate discussions about the board's credibility and the implications of its global reach. Key to the ongoing conversation is whether the board can foster genuine conflict resolution, a sentiment echoed in reports from Latimes and Channel News Asia.