UK Refuses To Join Trump Peace Board Amid Putin Row

The snowy peaks of Davos have always been a backdrop for grand pronouncements and global deals, but this year, the chill in the air wasn’t just meteorological. On January 22, 2026, the World Economic Forum’s annual gathering became the stage for a bold new diplomatic gambit: the unveiling of US President Donald Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’. Billed by the White House as a sweeping international organization to resolve conflicts, the initiative has already stirred controversy—and, notably, skepticism from some of America’s closest allies.

UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, speaking to BBC Breakfast from Davos, made headlines when she announced that Britain would not be among the signatories at the board’s launch ceremony. The reason? Concerns over Russian President Vladimir Putin’s possible participation and the broader implications of the board’s sweeping mandate. "We won't be one of the signatories today because this is a legal treaty that raises much broader issues," Cooper stated, adding, "And we do also have concerns about President Putin being part of something that's talking about peace when we've still not seen any signs from Putin that there will be commitment to peace in Ukraine."

The Board of Peace, as outlined in its leaked founding charter, is designed as an international organization with the aim to "promote stability, restore dependable and lawful governance, and secure enduring peace in areas affected or threatened by conflict." Yet, the document’s absence of any direct mention of Palestinian territory—despite the board’s origins as a plan to end the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza—has fueled criticism. Detractors argue that the board appears to be crafted to replace some functions of the United Nations, raising eyebrows among traditional allies and international observers alike.

Trump, never one to shy away from grand declarations, described the board at Davos as "one of the most consequential bodies ever created." He insisted it was not intended as a replacement for the UN but as a means to forge "everlasting" peace in the Middle East. According to BBC, the board grants Trump sweeping decision-making powers as chairman and US representative, including the authority to appoint executive board members and create or dissolve subsidiary bodies. Permanent membership, meanwhile, comes with a hefty $1 billion price tag—an offer that seems to favor the world’s wealthiest and most influential states.

So far, several countries have signaled their intention to join, including Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, and Israel. Trump also claimed that Putin had accepted an invitation to join the initiative, though the Kremlin has been more circumspect, stating that Russia is still “studying the invitation.” No other permanent members of the UN Security Council have committed to participation, a conspicuous absence that underscores the wariness with which the board is being received in some quarters.

The board’s charter is designed to enter into force once three states formally agree to be bound by it. Member states are granted renewable three-year terms, while those who pony up the $1 billion receive permanent seats. Last Friday, the White House named seven members of the founding Executive Board, including US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, and former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair. Since then, more countries—including Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar—have signaled their willingness to join. Even the Vatican has confirmed that the Pope has received an invitation.

Yet, for the United Kingdom, the calculus is more complicated. Cooper made clear that Britain strongly supports Trump’s 20-point plan to end the Gaza war and is eager to play a role in the second phase of the Gaza peace process. "That's why we are also clear we want to play our part in phase two of the Gaza peace process," she told BBC Breakfast. However, she stressed that the UK’s concerns about the legal and political ramifications of the board, combined with unease over Putin’s involvement, meant that London would not be signing up—at least not yet.

The UK’s hesitation is rooted in broader geopolitical anxieties. As Cooper explained, "We do also have concerns about President Putin being part of something that's talking about peace when we've still not seen any signs from Putin that there will be commitment to peace in Ukraine." With Russia’s invasion of Ukraine grinding on and no clear signals from Moscow about a willingness to negotiate, the idea of Putin sitting on a board dedicated to international peace strikes many in Westminster as, at best, premature.

Diplomatic relations between the US and UK have been under additional strain following Trump’s recent demands regarding Greenland. At one point, the US president threatened to impose tariffs on European nations if his demand to hand control of Greenland to the US was not met—a move that shocked many European leaders. However, after discussions with NATO and European allies, Trump backed down, dropping planned tariffs on eight European countries and ruling out the use of force to take the island. Cooper welcomed this apparent climbdown, noting that the UK and its European partners had put forward "positive, constructive proposals" on security in the Arctic.

Meanwhile, the UK has continued to assert its support for Ukraine. Alongside France, Britain has signed a declaration of intent to deploy troops to Ukraine if a peace deal can be reached with Russia. As talks to end the war in Ukraine continue, Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky are scheduled to meet in Davos—an encounter that could prove pivotal as both leaders seek to shape the future of the region.

Trump, for his part, has repeatedly suggested that a deal between Putin and Zelensky is within reach, though many in the international community remain skeptical. The White House’s initial pitch for the Board of Peace was focused on rebuilding Gaza and designing its future governance. However, as the leaked charter makes clear, the board’s ambitions now extend far beyond the Middle East, potentially reshaping the architecture of global conflict resolution.

For now, the board’s prospects remain uncertain. With major powers like the UK and France holding back, and Russia’s participation still up in the air, the Board of Peace’s path to legitimacy is anything but straightforward. As Cooper concluded, "But we will have continuing international discussions including with our allies." The coming weeks will reveal whether Trump’s latest diplomatic experiment can gain the traction it needs—or whether it will remain a bold, controversial footnote in the annals of Davos diplomacy.