A political theory professor says that the full document behind Donald Trump’s proposed “Board of Peace” sounds less like a serious international plan and more like an attempt to give Trump personal control over world affairs.
The charter for this board was sent to many world leaders, inviting them to take part in what was described as a panel to manage Gaza after the war. However, when the full text of the charter was reviewed, it did not mention Gaza at all. This raised immediate concerns about the real purpose of the organization.
Jacob T. Levy, a professor at McGill University, examined the document closely and said that the structure it describes is extremely troubling. In his view, it does not set up a fair or cooperative international body. Instead, it gives overwhelming power to Donald Trump personally, not to the office of the U.S. president or to the member countries. Levy said the plan effectively treats Trump as a kind of global ruler.
According to the rules in the charter, countries can only remain members for three years unless they either pay a billion dollars or the chairman alone decides to extend their membership. Even if a country pays, the chairman still has the power to remove it. Other members can only stop that decision if two-thirds of them vote against it, which Levy sees as an extremely unbalanced system.
While the charter says decisions are made by a majority vote, every decision still needs the chairman’s approval. Levy criticized this strongly, saying this is not how real group decision-making works. He compared it to the way medieval kings ruled with small advisory councils, where one person held ultimate authority.
The document also states that Donald Trump would be the first chairman and that the chairman always gets to choose his own successor. This means the position is not elected or limited in any meaningful way. Levy pointed out that this could allow Trump to hand control directly to one of his children, such as Donald Trump Jr., regardless of who is elected president of the United States in the future.
Levy went further, suggesting that even the United States itself could be treated like any other member country under this system. When the U.S. three-year membership term expires, the chairman could demand the same billion-dollar payment or simply remove the country from the organization altogether, even if a different president is in office at the time.
In Levy’s opinion, this proposal goes far beyond normal political controversy and enters the territory of outright corruption. He said that creating an organization like this would be grounds for impeachment, whether or not it ever has anything to do with Gaza. To him, the plan undermines the international system by placing the power of nations under the personal control of one family.
Levy concluded by saying that even though many people may feel numb to political scandals by now, this situation should still shock everyone.
