Showing posts sorted by date for query UKRAINE. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query UKRAINE. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Thursday, January 22, 2026

THE GRIFT

Who is joining Donald Trump's 'Board of Peace'?

AUTOCRATS,  ARISTOCRATS & AUTHORITARIANS JOIN THE FASCIST INTERNATIONAL


Issued on: 22/01/2026 - FRANCE24

US President Donald Trump has signed the founding charter of “Board of Peace” at Davos. The Board will be indefinitely chaired by Trump, who will have “exclusive authority to create, modify or dissolve subsidiary entities”. Here's who is participating.

Video by: Elitsa GADEVA


About 30 countries expected to join Trump's 'Board of Peace'
Issued on: 22/01/2026 
US President Donald Trump has unveiled his “Board of Peace,” a $1 billion initiative aimed at resolving international conflicts through permanent membership. Initially designed to oversee Gaza’s reconstruction, a draft of the board’s charter suggests its mandate could extend beyond the Palestinian territory. France24 Senior reporter James André shares his insights.
Video by: James ANDRE

Trump launches 'Board of Peace' at Davos signing ceremony

US President Donald Trump speaks at a Board of Peace charter announcement during the Annual Meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, 22 January 2026
Copyright Markus Schreiber/Copyright 2026 The AP. All rights reserved


By Aleksandar Brezar
Published on 

The board originated in the US president's 20-point Gaza ceasefire plan endorsed by the UN Security Council, but has expanded far beyond its initial mandate.

US President Donald Trump signed the charter to formally launch his "Board of Peace" initiative in Davos on Thursday, calling it a "very exciting day, long in the making".

"We're going to have peace in the world," Trump announced. "And we're all stars."

"Just one year ago the world was actually on fire, a lot of people didn't know it," Trump said in his opening speech. Yet "many good things are happening" and the threats around the world "are really calming down," the US president said.

Flanked by leaders of the board's founding member countries — including Argentinian President Javier Milei and Hungarian Premier Viktor Orbán — Trump also praised the work of his administration, "settling eight wars," and added that "a lot of progress" has been made toward ending Russia's all-out war in Ukraine.

He then took a moment to thank the heads of state in attendance. "We are truly honoured by your presence today,” Trump said, stating they were "in most cases very popular leaders, some cases not so popular.”

"In this group I like every single one of them," Trump quipped.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio was next to praise the Board of Peace as “a group of leaders that is about action” and credited Trump for bringing it together.

“He’s not limited by some of the things that have happened in the past, and he’s willing to talk to or engage with anyone in the interest of peace,” Rubio said.

Rubio stressed the body’s job “first and foremost” is “making sure that this peace deal in Gaza becomes enduring.” Then, Rubio said, it can look elsewhere.

With details of the board’s operations still unclear, Rubio described it as a work in progress.

“Many others who are going to join, you know, others either are not in town today or they have to go through some procedure internally in their own countries, in their own country, because of constitutional limitations, but others will join,” Rubio said.

'Most prestigious board ever'

Trump has previously described the newly-formed body as potentially the "most prestigious board ever formed."

The project originated in his 20-point Gaza ceasefire plan endorsed by the UN Security Council but has expanded far beyond its initial mandate.

Approximately 35 nations had committed to joining while 60 received invitations, according to Trump administration officials. The president suggested the board could eventually assume UN functions or render the world body obsolete.

"We have a lot of great people that want to join," Trump said during a Wednesday meeting with Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi, whose country confirmed membership.

Some leaders required parliamentary approval before committing, while uninvited nations were asking to be included, according to Trump.

Trump also defended inviting Russia's Vladimir Putin — who said he was consulting with "strategic partners" over Moscow's involvement — and strongman figures such as Belarus' Aliaksandr Lukashenka, saying he wanted "everybody" who was powerful and could "get the job done".

Several European allies declined participation. Norway, Sweden and France rejected invitations, with French officials expressing concern that the board might replace the UN as the world's main venue for conflict resolution, while affirming support for the Gaza peace plan itself.

Slovenian Prime Minister Robert Golob said "the time has not yet come to accept the invitation," citing worries the mandate was overly broad and could undermine international order based on the UN Charter, according to STA news agency.

Canada, Ukraine and China had not indicated their positions. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agreed to join on Wednesday.

The UK said it would not sign the treaty at Trump's ceremony over concerns regarding the invitation to Putin, British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper said.

One billion dollar fee

Countries seeking permanent membership face a $1 billion contribution fee, with Trump designated as permanent chairman even after leaving office, according to a copy of the charter obtained by media outlets. Non-paying members would have a three-year mandate.

Trump's peace initiative follows threats of military action against Iran this month during violent government crackdowns on large street protests that killed thousands. The president signalled no new strikes after receiving assurances that Tehran would not execute detained protesters.

Trump argued his aggressive Iran approach, including June strikes on nuclear facilities, proved essential for achieving the Israel-Hamas ceasefire. Iran served as Hamas' primary backer, providing hundreds of millions in military aid, weapons, training and financial support over the years.

"If we didn't do that, there was no chance of making peace," Trump said.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy arrived in Davos on Thursday morning with Trump expressing frustration with both Zelenskyy and Putin over their inability to end the nearly four-year w

"I believe they're at a point now where they can come together and get a deal done," Trump said. "And if they don't, they're stupid — that goes for both of them."



Trump charges $1 billion for permanent seat on Gaza ‘Board of Peace’, invites Russia’s Putin

A permanent seat on US President Donald Trump's "Board of Peace" aimed at resolving conflicts will cost countries $1 billion each, according to its charter. Invited world leaders include Russian President Vladimir Putin, Hungarian premier Viktor Orban and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney.


Issued on: 19/01/2026 - 
By: FRANCE 24

President Donald Trump at his Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida, Friday on January 16, 2026. © Julia Demaree Nikhinson, AP
01:52




US President Donald Trump's government has asked countries to pay $1 billion for a permanent spot on his "Board of Peace" aimed at resolving conflicts, according to its charter, seen Monday by AFP.

The White House has asked various world leaders to sit on the board, chaired by Trump himself, including Russian President Vladimir Putin, Hungarian premier Viktor Orban and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney.

Member countries – represented on the board by their head of state – would be allowed to join for three years – or longer if they paid more than $1.0 billion within the first year, the charter says.

"Each Member State shall serve a term of no more than three years from this Charter's entry into force, subject to renewal by the Chairman," the board's draft charter says.

Trump tariff policies © FRANCE 24
01:47


"The three-year membership term shall not apply to Member States that contribute more than USD $1,000,000,000 in cash funds to the Board of Peace within the first year of the Charter's entry into force."

The board was originally conceived to oversee the rebuilding of Gaza, but its charter does not appear to limit its role to the occupied Palestinian territory.

The White House said there would be a main board, a Palestinian committee of technocrats meant to govern devastated Gaza, and a second "executive board" that appears designed to have a more advisory role.

"The Board of Peace is an international organization that seeks to promote stability, restore dependable and lawful governance, and secure enduring peace in areas affected or threatened by conflict," the charter says.

'Failed institutions'

It appears to take a swipe at international institutions such as the United Nations, saying that the board should have "the courage to depart from approaches and institutions that have too often failed."

Trump has regularly criticized the United Nations and announced this month that his country will withdraw from 66 global organizations and treaties – roughly half affiliated with the UN.

Membership of the board would be "limited to States invited to participate by the Chairman," according to the draft charter.

Trump would have the power to remove member states from the board, subject to a veto by two-third of members, and choose his replacement should he leave his role as chairman.

The "Board of Peace" began to take shape on Saturday when the leaders of Egypt, Turkey, Argentina and Canada were asked to join.

Trump also named as members Secretary of State Marco Rubio, former British prime minister Tony Blair, senior negotiator Steve Witkoff and his son-in-law Jared Kushner.

Israel has objected to the line-up of a "Gaza executive board" to operate under the body, which includes Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan and Qatari diplomat Ali Al-Thawadi.

(FRANCE 24 with AFP)


Will Trump's 'board of peace' in Gaza really rival the UN?



Issued on: 20/01/2026 
FRANCE24

Play (05:22 min)



PRESS REVIEW – Tuesday, January 20: Donald Trump's "board of peace" in Gaza aims to oversee the peace process between Israel and Hamas, but critics say he intends to create a rival body to the UN. Also, the Italian dailies pay tribute to the "ultimate emperor" of Italian fashion, Valentino, who has died aged 93. The Beckham family's disputes are the focus of the British tabloids. Finally, an Austrian cow proves that the animals are extremely intelligent.

We begin with Donald Trump's so-called board of peace in Gaza. Officially, the board aims to oversee the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, as The New York Times reports. Trump sent out letters of invitations last week to "historically close" US allies like Canada and France, but also Russia and Belarus. The charter of the board indicated a desire to get involved in all types of global conflicts, beyond just Gaza. As the Times notes, this is why critics fear the board is set up to rival the UN. So far, only a handful of Trump-allied countries have RSVPd positively.

There is a catch, of course. Countries that agree to join the board can serve for three years, but that can be permanent if they agree to pay $1 billion in cash to the board. The Wall Street Journal calls it Trump’s "One-billion-dollar diplomacy club." The charter doesn't say how these funds will be used and by whom. But of course, Trump would have overriding powers to veto and revoke membership. Despite overseeing Gaza, the board does not have any Palestinian members yet. French President Emmanuel Macron says France doesn't plan to join. This prompted Trump to threaten a 200 percent tax on French champagne and wine. The Guardian's Owen Jones is outraged about the council, which he calls an "appalling neocolonial project". The fact that not a single seat is reserved for a Palestinian, he says, shows that Trump aims to play the role of "Gaza’s emperor."

We move on to a man the Italian dailies are calling an emperor: fashion designer Valentino Garavani, who has passed away in Rome at 93. Valentino was known mononymously and dressed royals, Hollywood stars and first ladies. The tributes are pouring in for a man who defined Italian fashion. La Repubblica calls him the "ultimate emperor." Il Giornale calls him "Saint Valentino" and bids adieu to a "man who defined style." "Red Paradise," La Stampa says, alluding to the colour that defined Valentino and his designs, even becoming known for the Valentino Rosso shade. Il Messagero says "Roma in the world". Valentino set up his fashion house in the Italian capital in 1960.

Next, there's trouble in paradise for the Beckham family, whose family spats are playing out in the British tabloids. Brooklyn Beckham, the eldest son of David and Victoria Beckham, broke his silence on social media about a growing rift within his family. He laid it on thick and fast and has disowned his parents, the Daily Star reports. He accused his parents of being obsessed with the family name and publicity, accused his mother of being too controlling, of disrespecting his wife, of humiliating him during his wedding and of trying to bribe him to sign away the rights to his family name. The tirade is as extraordinary as it is rare these days. "Brooklyn goes nuclear," the Daily Mail says on its front page

Finally, scientists are astounded by a discovery about the intelligence of cows and they can thank Veronika, a beautiful brown cow living peacefully in the Austrian Alps. She recently demonstrated an "impressive and until now undocumented" knack for tool use, the Guardian reports. Veronika was observed using a stick to scratch her back – this tool use was previously only seen in humans and chimpanzees. Researchers discovered that she could also pick up a broom and wield it according to the job at hand. It's proof that cows are much more intelligent than we give them credit for!

Wednesday, January 21, 2026

Greenland, NATO and war: Fact-checking Trump’s Davos speech



Copyright AP Photo

By Tamsin Paternoster & James Thomas & Estelle Nilsson-Julien and Noa Schumann
Published on 21/01/2026


Addressing the World Economic Forum, US President Donald Trump attacked Europe’s energy policies and alleged the US “returned” Greenland to Denmark following World War Two. The Cube looks at where facts back his claims.


From repeating his long-running claim regarding ending eight wars, to evoking World War II history to stake his claim on Greenland, US President Donald Trump made a series of bold statements during his Wednesday speech in Davos.

The Cube, Euronews’ fact-checking team, has looked at some of his assertions to determine their accuracy.

NATO has 'never done anything' for the US

Trump repeatedly criticised NATO and its members for not pulling their weight in his speech, complaining that the US gets very little compared to what it gets back, casting doubt on whether the alliance would support his country in an attack.

“We’ve never got anything out of NATO,” the president said, adding later: “We’ve never asked for anything, it’s always a one-way street.”

“We’ll be there 100% for NATO, but I’m not sure they’ll be there for us,” Trump added.

However, the US is the only country to have ever invoked NATO’s Article 5 common defence measure, triggering an obligation for each country to come to its assistance. It did so in the aftermath of the 11 September attacks in 2001.

RUTTE CALLED TRUMP 'DADDY'

President Donald Trump meets with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in the Oval Office of the White House, in Washington on 22 October 2025. AP Photo

According to NATO, the alliance assisted the USin various ways, including enhancing intelligence sharing, providing increased security to US facilities, and launching its first-ever anti-terror operation — Operation Eagle Assist — between October 2001 and May 2002.

Trump also asserted that the US was paying “virtually 100%” of NATO’s budget before he entered office, but that’s not true either.

If he was referring to NATO’s common budget, then according to thealliance’s figures, the US was contributing some 15.9% to its funds between 2024 and 2025, alongside Germany. This included its civil budget, military budget and security investment programme.


The number has dropped to just under 15% for 2026-2027, again alongside Germany. The next biggest contributors are the UK (10.3%), France (10.1%) and Italy (8%).


French service members participate in multinational military Exercise Pikne ("Lightning") on Saaremaa Island, Estonia, September 2025. AP Photo

It’s possible that Trump was referring to NATO members’ defence spending, which he criticised at several points during his speech, too, but it’s still wrong to say the US was ever contributing 100% to the alliance’s defence.

Back in 2016, the last year before Trump took office the first time around, US defence spending was in the clear majority (71%) of the total by all NATO members, but that’s not close to 100%.

Since then, it’s fallen to a figure estimated to be around 66%.

These numbers are not to be confused with members’ defence spending as a percentage of their GDP, which was originally set at a 2% target. It has since been increased to 5% by 2035 (excluding Spain), after Trump criticised that not enough countries were meeting the original number.

Recent figures put Polandat the topwith 4.48%, followed by Lithuania (4%) and Latvia (3.73%). The US is in sixth place at 3.22%.
Are Germany’s electricity prices 64% higher than 2017?

During his speech, Trump attacked European countries' energy policies and claimed that Germany's electricity prices are 64% higher now than they were in 2017.

“Germany generates 22% less electricity than it did in 2017. And it's not the current Chancellor's fault, he is solving the problem, he is going to do a great job. But what they did before him, I guess that's why he got there. The electricity prices are 64% higher,” he said.

It’s not clear where Trump is getting his data from, and whether he is counting electricity prices for households or for non-households. It is true that Germany has generated less electricity in recent years since 2017, and that renewables account for a much larger share of the country’s total energy generation, a shift that has grown steadily over decades.


President Donald Trump and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz pose during the family picture at the Gaza International Peace Summit, in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, October 2025. AP Photo

An initial look at data from the German Association of Energy and Water Industries, which represents around 2,000 energy and water companies in Germany, shows that household electricity cost 30,36 cents per kilowatt-hour in 2017 on average. In 2025, the average price was around 39.28 cents per kWh.

That represents an increase of around 29%, not 64%.

Data from Germany’s Federal Statistics Office and Eurostat depict a similar picture. According to it, households in Germany paid an average of 30.4 cents per kWh in 2017 and 39.92 cents in the first half of 2025 — an increase of around 31%.

Elsewhere, Trump blamed the renewable energy policies of left-leaning governments for “extremely high prices” and what he called the “New Green Scam”.

“There are windmills over the place, and they are losers,” he told the crowd.

Overall, Germany’s electricity prices have increased. They spiked particularly in 2022 and 2023 in what experts say was an increase directly linked to the collapse of gas supplies over Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in early 2022.

Wind turbines operate as the sun rises at the Klettwitz Nord solar energy park near Klettwitz near Klettwitz, Germany, October 2024. AP Photo

Renewable energy has added long-term system and grid costs to electricity bills, but it was not the main driver of Germany’s electricity price spike during this period.

Trump also said of the UK that it “produces just 1/3 of the total energy from all sources that it did in 1999. Think of that 1/3. And they're sitting on top of the North Sea — one of the greatest reserves anywhere in the world, but they don't use it.”

UK government data shows that energy production in 2023 is down 66% from 1999, when “UK production peaked”, so roughly by one-third.

According to it, oil and gas production from the North Sea, a major source of energy for the UK for decades, has declined naturally as “most accessible oil and gas has already been extracted”, making Trump’s claim that the UK “doesn’t use” its North Sea reserves misleading.
ADVERTISEMENT



Recently, there has been an uptick in rhetoric, particularly from the Conservative Party, that the UK should push for more oil and oil production in the North Sea.
Fixing eight wars

During his address, Trump reiterated his claim that he has ended eight wars since commencing his second Presidential term in January 2025.

He has previously listed these conflicts as: Israel and Hamas, Israel and Iran, Egypt and Ethiopia, India and Pakistan, Serbia and Kosovo, Rwanda and Congo, Armenia and Azerbaijan, and Cambodia and Thailand.

Although Trump has played a part in mediation efforts in a number of these conflicts, his impact is not as clear-cut as he alleges. Although he is credited with ending the 12-day war between Israel and Iran, this can be seen as a temporary respite from an ongoing cold war.

Fresh fighting broke out between Cambodia and Thailand in December. Although a peace agreement between Congolese forces and Rwanda-backed rebels was brokered by the Trump administration, fighting has continued, and M23 — the Rwandan-backed rebel group in the eastern DRC — was not party to the agreement.

Although the US announced the launch of the second phase of the Gaza ceasefire plan in mid-January, the next steps in this process remain shrouded in uncertainty. Many of the points in the first phase of Trump's 20-point plan have not materialised.

Friction between Egypt and Ethiopia over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam is best described as heightened tension, not war. There has been no threat of war between Serbia and Kosovo during Trump’s second term, nor has he made any significant contribution to improving relations in his first year back in the White House.

And while the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan signed a deal aimed at ending a decades-long conflict at the White House in August, they have yet to sign a peace treaty, and their parliaments would still need to ratify it.
RelatedFact check: Can the EU defend Greenland in a US attack?
Fact check: What is Trump's 'Board of Peace' and would it have real power?
Has Greenland banned Donald Trump and his descendants?
The US ‘returned’ Denmark to Greenland

Donald Trump repeatedly claimed during his speech that the United States had returned Greenland to Denmark after World War Two.

“We already had it as a trustee, but respectfully returned it back to Denmark not long ago,” the former president said.

In reality, while the US assumed responsibility for Greenland’s defence during the war, this did not affect Denmark’s sovereignty over the island.


After the conflict, Denmark was required to list Greenland with the United Nations as a “non-self-governing territory”, effectively acknowledging its colonial status.

The US has sought to purchase Greenland on several occasions over the past century. Most notably, in 1946, President Harry Truman offered Denmark $100 million in gold, an offer Copenhagen rejected.

Under a 1951 defence agreement, Washington formally recognised the “sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark over Greenland”.

In 2004, the US also acknowledged Greenland’s status as an equal part of the Danish kingdom, following changes to the territory’s constitutional position.

THE GRIFT

Norway will not participate in Donald Trump's 'Board of Peace,' PM's office says

The Norwegian and US flags are seen on the table at the Pentagon, 20 September, 2022
Copyright AP Photo

By Gavin Blackburn
Published on 

Trump's Board of Peace was originally conceived to oversee the rebuilding of Gaza, but according to its charter the scope does not appear to limit its role to the Palestinian territory.

Norway's government said on Wednesday it would not join the Board of Peace initiated by US President Donald Trump, who has vented his frustration at the Nordic country after being snubbed for the Nobel Peace Prize.

"The American proposal raises a number of questions" requiring "further dialogue with the United States", State Secretary Kristoffer Thoner said in a statement.

"Norway will therefore not join the proposed arrangements for the Board of Peace, and will therefore not attend a signing ceremony in Davos," Thoner said.

Norway would continue its close cooperation with the United States, he added.

Trump's Board of Peace was originally conceived to oversee the rebuilding of Gaza, but according to its charter the scope does not appear to limit its role to the Palestinian territory

Attendees listen to the address of US President Donald Trump during the Annual Meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, 21 January, 2026 AP Photo

The US administration has asked countries to pay up to $1 billion for a permanent spot on the board, on which Trump will serve as chairman.

"For Norway, it is important how this proposal is linked to established structures as the UN, and to our international commitments," Thoner added.

The government representative added that Norway shared Trump's "goal of lasting peace in Ukraine, Gaza and in other situations."

Trump has repeatedly said he believes he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize. Last year's prize went to Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado.

In a message to Norway's Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre published on Monday, Trump said having been denied the prize he no longer felt "an obligation to think purely of Peace."

Støre said in a statement: "I have clearly explained, including to President Trump, what is well known - the prize is awarded by an independent Nobel Committee.”



Gaza Vanishing: Trump’s Board of Peace


Donald Trump’s Board of Peace overseeing the reconstruction of Gaza was always going to raise a host of niggling questions. From the outset, the US President made it clear he would be the helmsman of what was essentially an outfit of selected corporate overseers tilling the soil for The Donald’s posterity fund. These anointed sorts have been given the ostensible task of reviving and resuscitating a pulverised, rubble strewn enclave that has seen atrocities aplenty visited upon it. But to what end?

The envisaged structure of control over Gaza, seen as a vital part of fulfilling Trump’s 20-point plan for the territory, opens the second phase of the peace process. It’s already clear that the Board is a cheese platter of billionaires and pro-Israeli figures, with Bulgarian diplomat Nickolay Mladenov being named its “High Representative”. A Gaza Executive Board will work with the Office of the High Representative and an inconsequential Palestinian technocratic body, the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG). In a statement, the White House notes that the NCAG will be led by technocrat Ali Sha’ath, formerly of the Palestinian Authority, who will be charged with the tasks of restoring core public services, the reconstruction of civil institutions, “and the stabilization of daily life in Gaza, while laying the foundation for a long-term, self-sustaining governance.”

We already have a sense of how the pantomime will unfold. There are the Trump feet washers such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio; men of money such as the Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff; the family angle with the President’s son-in-law Jared Kushner; and that paragon of insincerity and ill-judgment on Middle East affairs, former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair.

The charter of the Board of Peace, a copy of which was circulated among dozens of heads of state with invitations to join, carries a fee of US$1 billion for countries seeking a permanent seat on it. Those not wishing to provide the fee will serve for three years. The document is further notable for what it does not say. Gaza does not make it into the text. Nor does the United Nations. It does, however, speak about the need for “a more nimble and effective international peace-building body”, which looks ominously like a subversive stab at the UN, a body whose alleged impotence Trump has done so much to encourage. To make peace durable, it was important to have “the courage to depart from… institutions that have too often failed.” The proposition as to why such institutions fail is never considered, much like the happy arsonist who starts fires in order to extinguish them.

Even before these bodies have taken shape, trouble is brewing. Despite the warm, favourable slant shown towards Israel in this venture, one designed to keep Palestinians in their downtrodden place, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was not delighted to find out that Turkey and Qatar would also have a role to play on the Gaza Executive Board. They might spoil the platter and sour the offerings. “The announcement regarding the composition of the Gaza executive board, which is subordinate to the Board of Peace,” stated a note from the PM’s office, “was not co-ordinated with Israel and runs contrary to its policy.”

In remarks made during an agitated debate in the Knesset plenum on January 19, Netanyahu was adamant that involvement by Ankara and Doha would not be military in nature: “Turkish or Qatari soldiers will not be in the Strip.” These sentiments are seemingly misplaced, given that Qatar lacks a force suitable to make such a contribution. The Israeli PM also insisted that both countries would be denied any authoritative role or have any influence on the various bodies, despite Trump’s willingness to include Turkish and Qatari representatives on the Gaza Executive Board.

Despite being overlooked on the issue of consultation regarding Turkey and Qatar, Netanyahu was boisterous enough to insist that standing up to Washington was something he was rather good at. “When it comes to Israel’s essential interest, we can argue, we can sharpen our positions, and, by the way, we can come to agreements.”

This did not convince the opposition leader and chair of the Yesh Atid party, Yair Lapid. As with most Israeli politicians, the prospect that the Palestinians might even dare to behave in sovereign fashion in Gaza remains both inconceivable and abhorrent. Allies of Hamas, he complained, “have been invited to run Gaza”, while the “dominant factor” of the Palestinian technocratic committee was the Palestinian Authority. This suggested one of two possibilities: either Netanyahu had slyly “agreed behind our backs that Turkey, Qatar, and the Palestinian Authority would be in Gaza” or he had been ignorant of their inclusion, in which case “Trump doesn’t give a damn about you.” Israel was “returning to Gaza, not at the starting point, but to a point much worse than at the beginning.”

Those worried about this venture being one to displace or marginalise the UN (Julien Barnes-Dacey of the European Council on Foreign Relations is of this view) should think again. Chaos seems imminent, with the Board looking much like a waxwork effort by sketchy amateur artists, likely to melt when heat is applied. There will be much fractiousness and no longevity about a project that says nothing of institutions and everything about the moods of a person who, when he departs, will see it wither. Narcissism lies at its core and may well die with it. The concern here is whether aspirations for Palestinian sovereignty will do the same.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.comRead other articles by Binoy.

COMPRADOR

Belarusian opposition leader Kolesnikova adds to calls for Europe to engage with Putin, Lukashenko

Belarusian opposition leader Kolesnikova adds to calls for Europe to engage with Putin, Lukashenko
Belarusian opposition leader Maria Kolesnikova added her voice to the growing number ofcalls for Europe to engage in direct talks with Lukashenko and Putin. / bne IntelliNews
By Ben Aris in Berlin January 21, 2026

Belarusian opposition leader Maria Kolesnikova said that it's time for Europe to engage in talks with pariahed Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko, in a remarkable contrast with her colleagues who have spent more than five years asking for the sanctions screws on Minks to be tightened.

Recently released from jail where she was serving an 11-year sentence on politically motivated charges, Kolesnikova argues that “Lukashenko is a pragmatic person. He understands the language of business. If he is ready for humanitarian steps in response to a relaxation of sanctions, including the release of prisoners and allowing independent media and NGOs into Belarus, this needs to be discussed.”

While her opposition leader colleagues largely fled the country after the mass demonstrations sparked by the massively falsified presidential election in August 2020 began to fade, Kolesnikova stayed on until she was snatched from the street by security forces and thrown in jail.

As bne IntelliNews reported, there has been arguments amongst the Belarusian government in exile, headed by Belarusian opposition leader Svetlana Tikhanovskaya (Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya) who ran in the 2020 elections against Lukashenko and is believed to have won by a landslide.

Tikhanovskaya leads a faction within the opposition that believe they should lobby Europe to tighten sanctions and release all of the some 1,300 remaining political prisoners still in jail at once.

However, after a string of political prisoner releases brokered by the White House, there are others that believe a step by step approach would be more effective – an argument boosted by the release of high profile prisoners in a series of deals in the last year, including the release of Kolesnikov herself and Tikhanovskaya’s husband, Sergei last June.

The US success has clearly had an impact on the debate. “But as someone with a European mindset, I do not understand why Europe did not start talking to Lukashenko before the US,” Kolesnikova said. “It is obvious that Germany, for example, has far more ties with Belarus than the States.”

Her argument runs counter to Europe’s approach of keeping links with Belarusian democratic forces in exile, minimising contacts with the regime, and maintaining economic sanctions on exports, a ban on flights and tighter visa rules.

Promoting this kind of dialogue — particularly aimed at securing the release of other political prisoners and preventing further repressions — is now her focus. “I think it’s clear that I’m not leaving politics.”

“One day the regime will change,” Kolesnikova told the FT. “And by that point, there must not be scorched earth there. We must prepare the ground.”

Europe’s hardline is softening

For all his myriad faults, Trump’s two biggest successes has been to hold the first direct talks with Putin since the failed 2022 Istanbul peace deal talks and make real progress towards bringing the war in Ukraine to an end. The second is he has brokered the release of some 200 political prisoners from Belarusian jails as relations with the US begin to thaw.

Europe’s hardline policy of sending authoritarian leaders to Coventry is starting to melt as the war in Ukraine goes nowhere, Europe finds itself in increasingly difficult financial straits and US President Donald Trump puts the cat amongst the pigeons with his efforts to dismantle the international rules-based order.

The pressure on Kyiv to capitulate is mounting fast and Europe is increasingly powerless to prevent that from happening. Since the start of January Russia has launched a missile and drone barrage against Ukraine’s biggest cities that has plunged them into a hell of freezing cold and darkness. As of the time of writing, residents of Kyiv are starting to flee the increasingly uninhabitable capital where temperatures inside some of the blacked out apartment blocks have fallen to below -5°C according to local reports.

Around one in six residents heeded Mayor Vitali Klitschko's call for temporary evacuation: 600,000 of the 3.6mn inhabitants have left the city since January 9, Klitschko told the AFP news agency. "Not everyone has the opportunity to leave the city, but the population is currently shrinking," Klitschko said.

And since the Trump administration cut off all funding to Ukraine and won’t sell it weapons unless Europe pays for them, the already economically distressed leading European governments are wondering how they can foot a €100bn a year bill that continuing the war in Ukraine will cost. In December the EU raised a €90bn loan to keep the government in Kyiv afloat, two thirds of which will be spent on weapons, but even that was around €50bn short of what the war is expected to cost over the next two years. Moreover, Europe’s defence industry will struggle to produce the number and quality of weapons Ukraine is so desperate for – more air defence ammo topping the list.

Zelenskiy appeared to be facing harsh realities when he said earlier this month that the war may be over by this summer – an unusual statement as the Ukraine’s president is usually reluctant to ascribe timelines to comments like this.

French President Emmanuel Macron was the first to say it outloud, calling for Europe to open direct talks with the Kremlin. He was followed soon after by Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni who agreed that the time had come for direct negotiations. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz did an abrupt about face a week later, calling Russia a "European" country and saying Berlin was also open to direct negotiations.

Maybe most surprising of all was former Nato Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, who added his voice to the growing cacophony on January 17, saying Western countries should "talk to Russia as a neighbour."

"We need to discuss ending the fighting in Ukraine with Russia just as we, the United States, and other countries are doing... We need to talk to Russia as a neighbor," he said in an interview with Der Spiegel magazine.

Unity within the EU in its support of Ukraine and opposition to Russia is crumbling. Ukraine fatigue has built up steadily as it becomes increasingly obvious that Ukraine will not be able to win a military victory against Russia.

Add to that there is a certain ennui amongst EU leaders to the fact that as the US-sponsored peace talks got underway in earnest in December with the peace plan thrashed out between US envoys and Putin in a Moscow meeting on December 3 where the EU suggestions were entirely ignored. Part of the motivation for calling for direct talks is to reinject European interests into the dialogue, although the Kremlin is unlikely to welcome engaging in the negotiations. Russian President Vladimir Putin has said in the last month that he sees Europe as the biggest obstacle to doing a peace deal.

Trump actively dismantling the international rules-base order

Trump actively dismantling the international rules-base order
US president Trump is systematically dismantling the international order and may provoke a major trade war with Europe that will hurt everyone. / bne IntelliNews
By Ben Aris in Berlin January 21, 2026

Trump is actively dismantling the international rules-based order, dismantling or sidelining the multinational institutions that have been built up since the end of WWII, and put himself personally in charge of running the world.

This process has been unfolding for a year already. It started in Ukraine when he conflated the principled support for Ukraine’s stand against Russian aggression with business deals.

As part of his 28-point peace plan (28PPP) was a proposal to seize the Central Bank of Russia (CBR)’s frozen $300bn in reserves and create a $100bn Ukraine restoration funds and another $200bn US-Russia investment fund for commercial joint venture projects – a major sop for Russian President Vladimir Putin and a de facto rehabilitation of Russia into the international community. In addition, Trump tied any support for Ukraine to the minerals deal that was signed on April 30 and gave significant concessions to US companies, but offered no critical security guarantees in return whatsoever.

That episode could still be sold as a “pragmatic” solution to winning over US support for Ukraine’s fight to regain control over its sovereign territory, but with the decapitation of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro’s regime on January 3 all pretence at following the rules was dropped.

America’s early morning bombing and helicopter assault on Caracas. The kidnapping of a sitting president. The cold-blooded execution of 100 Venezuelan presidential guards and their Cuban colleagues. And Trump’s open admission that the entire operation was all about grabbing control of Venezuela’s oil. This was all totally illegal under international law and flies in the face of the UN Charter that is supposed to be the bedrock of the international order.

To add insult to injury, Trump’s decision to hand over the concession to dispose of 50mn barrels of oil seized as part of the raid to his mega-donor Vitol, the world’s largest independent oil trader, to dispose of was a corrupt insider deal worthy of the Kremlin and Putin’s sweetheart deals for his inner circle of stoligarchs.

Trump is becoming bolder and bolder as he asserts his transactional approach to geopolitics. The emerging new economic paradigm is a return to nineteenth century imperialism where might-makes-right is the new rule book. This was codified in the recently released National Security Strategy (NSS) where the trans-Atlantic shared values “special relationship” that has driven US-EU relations since the end of WWII is over. Europe has been downgraded to simply being a US market and the White House has openly said it will interfere with European domestic politics, favouring the parties of the far-right. The upgraded Monroe Doctrine that is spelled out in the NSS is a reassertion of “America First, and everyone else last”.

The latest escalation is even more extreme. All coming one on top of the other, Trump is now proposing to send in 100,000 troops to Greenland, which has a population of 57,000 people, to take control of the country for the sake of US “national security” needs. It will be the easiest invasion ever, as US soldiers will outnumber the unarmed Greenlanders five-to-one and can simply walk into the parliament building without firing a shot.

Trump has justified this plan by claiming that Russia and China “may” annex the island, which is complete nonsense. China’s foreign ministry issued a statement this week, calling on Trump to drop the “fake China-threat” argument, used to justify his own “selfish” ambitions.

Russia has never expressed any interest in Greenland either, but has bitterly objected to Trump’s proposed annexation of Greenland. The idea of US troops establishing bases on the island, which lies on Russia’s northern border creates a security issue for the Kremlin where there was none before – very similar to the Kremlin’s objection of Nato moving into Ukraine on Russia’s western borders, just across from European Russia where 80% of the population lives.

Just the possibility of the US moving missiles into a new “51st state” that could strike Russian missile and military bases deep inside the country, that were previously out of range of European-based Nato munitions, would create a new security crisis where none existed before. Russia would inevitably respond. It invaded Ukraine simply because the US refused to contemplate any exclusion from Nato for Ukraine despite the fact the White House and Brussels have adamantly repeated there was never any plans to allow Ukraine into Nato. Turning Greenland into a US militarised proxy, even if no more bases are built and no troops are stationed there, is a giant step on from any possible Nato-proxy threat Ukraine poses to Russia.

The implications of a US annexation of Greenland are too grim to contemplate. One Nato country attacking and annexing another Nato country spells the end of Nato. It flies in the face of the UN charter. It makes the US the enemy of Europe, more aggressive and threatening than Russia or China. Putin has invaded Ukraine which is neither a member of the EU nor Nato. Trump would have invaded Greenland, which is a member of both.

A US annexation of Greenland means there are no rules at all anymore. But that was already clear after Trump ordered the kidnap of Maduro purely so he could seize Venezuela’s oil.

Peace Council

Trump’s efforts to dismantle the international order are no longer haphazard or piecemeal. As the process goes on, it is becoming systematic and it is escalating.

2025 was characterised by a series of ad hoc measures, but as his confidence grows he is now attempting to institutionalise the process. The latest initiative is to set up a “Board of Peace” that is an attempt to sideline the UN and silence the voices of all the other countries in the world in the process.

This could trigger a new and extreme crisis. Europe, in particular, has been put in a desperate position where it now has to choose to either stand up to Trump and stick to its principles or trigger a debilitating trade war.

Europe’s collective economy is already flat on its back due to the boomerang effect of the Russian sanctions. France is facing a major budget deficit crisis it has lost control of. Germany’s economic model has been wrecked by the end of cheap Russian gas and has been in recession for three years now. And the UK is being strangled by its mounting and increasingly unsustainable debt burden.

The game is in play in Davos where European leaders are due to meet Trump in the next few days and have an almost impossible choice to make.

Trump is proposing to set up a conflict resolution body, the Board of Peace, with himself as chairman and retaining veto powers over any decision the council reaches.

We don’t need a Peace Council. We already have one. It’s called the UN. And everyone is already a member of that. Trump is actively trying to usurp the UN and put himself personally in charge of running the world. If Russian President Vladimir Putin had done this, he would be called a fascist and compared to Hitler.

So far invitations to join the Peace Council have been extended to 60 countries. (The UN has 193 members.) Countries that have already said yes include UAE, Kosovo and Israel. Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko gleefully signed off on accepting his invitation yesterday. Russia has also been invited but the Kremlin is still thinking about it. (The Kremlin has always said the UN is the appropriate body to run a multipolar world.)

Other countries that have reacted positively to the idea include Hungary, Vietnam, Kazakhstan, Argentina, Morocco and Canada. Those that have already definitely rejected the invite include France, Norway and Sweden. Notably, Brussels has yet to comment. Trump says he only needs three countries to say yes to set the Council up.

The foundation of the rules based international order was established by the UN Charter signed in 1945 that was designed to prevent another world war. It commits members to sovereign equality, non-use of force, territorial integrity, and peaceful settlement of disputes. The economic and financial governance was covered by the Bretton Woods deal in 1944 and trade by General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1947.

Trump has already withdrawn from multiple UN institutions, most notably the Paris Climate Agreement. But that process is now accelerating, after he recently cancelled the US membership in 66 international institutions, 31 of them UN bodies including the UN Human Rights council and WHO. On economics he has threatened to punish any country that tries to drop the dollar and on trade he is using the US status as a major trade partner to weaponize tariffs with his poignantly named Liberation Day tariff regime.

The construction of an international order has been going on since the end of WWII. A major plank in this effort were Helsinki Accords signed in 1975 by 35 states, specifically including the US and the Soviet Union that codified the rules and stabilised tensions during the Cold War.

The Accords emerged from the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) that set post-war borders in Europe, and created rules for coexistence between East and West. Crucially, they linked security, economic cooperation, and human rights into a single framework in three “baskets”: the inviolability of existing borders in Europe; trade and economic cooperation; and guarantees for human rights and fundamental freedoms

Trump is proposing to throw all this work out of the window and Europe, as the leader of the values-based system, is now facing an existential choice.

French President Emmanuel Macron summed up the issues in his speech delivered in Davos on January 20. Wearing sunglasses to conceal his eye condition, the president warned that the world is entering a phase of “increasing instability”.

“International law is trampled underfoot and the only law that seems to matter is that of the strongest,” he told the assembled captains of the global economy.

“We are approaching a world without rules,” he cautioned, in a speech marked by explicit references to the return of “imperial ambitions” and the “normalization of conflict as a political tool.”

Former Nato Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen put it even more bluntly: "The time for flattery of Trump is over."

Should I stay or should I go?

Following the raid on Caracas, the threats of bombing Iran (which still might happen next week) and now the potential invasion of Greenland, the EU’s policy of appeasing Trump is facing a litmus test. Trump has largely ignored all European demands and entreats so far. Europe is coming up to a red line where it may be forced to take retaliatory trade action itself. Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping must be looking on in amazement.

But European leaders are split on Trump's offer to join the Peace Council and the issue will only deepen the already increasingly divided EU. It is clear that France will fight back, but for countries like Britain, which is not an EU member, London may choose to fold and attempt to revive its own “special relation” with the US, forged in the days of the Margret Thatcher, Ronald Reagen double act. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico will go with Trump. The Nordic states will oppose him.

The Peace Council has already undermined Western unity in the Ukraine conflict. Lukashenko was delighted by the offer and leapt on the possibility to reagitate Belarus’ return to the, albeit Trumpian, international order. (Although he also made it clear he was not going to pay the $1bn membership fees Trump is demanding.)

Trump is clearly narked by Macron’s criticism and leaked private messages from Macron in which the French president proposed organizing a G7 summit in Paris, even with the possibility of inviting Russia on the sidelines of the meeting, which would have marked the first high-level rapprochement since the start of the war in Ukraine. In Davos, Macron denied any such meeting was planned and avoided elaborating on the episode.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk is another one that is calling for a showdown. He urged European countries to resolutely defend their interests amid “blackmail” by Trump. Tusk, without directly mentioning either the US or Trump, called on European partners to stop "appeasement" and to defend their interests more firmly.

"Appeasement is always a manifestation of weakness. Europe cannot afford weakness - neither towards enemies nor towards an ally. Appeasement ends with a lack of results - except humiliation. At this time, European perseverance and confidence are very much needed," the Polish Prime Minister noted.

The choice is between economic wellbeing and points of principles. The US-Europe trade pair is the biggest in the world with over $1 trillion of annual turnover. At the same time, they have also the heaviest mutual foreign direct investment (FDI) of some $5 trillion investment stock in each other’s country – the fruits of 80 years of that special relationship.

A major trade war would wreck this relationship permanently with major economic consequences.

Now we are waiting to see what will happen next. Trump is firing his first salvos, threatening to put 10% on European countries that do not join the Peace Council, and singled out France for a 200% tariff on champagne.

The EU has already prepared its own retaliatory package of tariffs that target things like US-made motorbikes and bourbon whiskey in case Trump rolls out his threatened 10% additional tariffs on top of the 15% already conceded by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last year. However, if things escalate, Brussels has its "trade bazooka" in reserve: a set of regulations that could freeze US companies out of the European market entirely.