Trump’s Greenland threats strain allies and complicate next steps in Gaza ‘Board of Peace’ plan

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s effort to build international backing for a Gaza ceasefire framework is colliding with backlash from allies, as his threats to seize Greenland from Denmark and other aggressive moves raise doubts about U.S. intentions and reliability.

The administration has promoted a U.N. Security Council-backed initiative often described as a “Board of Peace,” which would oversee a postwar Gaza process and potentially expand to other global crises. But European governments have been wary, particularly after Trump suggested the body could rival—or even replace—the United Nations.

According to reporting on the initiative, more than 60 invitations were issued to join, yet fewer than 10 had been accepted. The limited uptake has included leaders critics characterize as authoritarian, while several core U.S. partners in Europe have declined or remained noncommittal.

The diplomatic headwinds intensified after Trump ordered a military operation early this month to capture Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro and then publicly threatened to use force to annex Greenland, a move that would directly challenge the sovereignty of a fellow NATO member. Those actions, diplomats say, make it harder to persuade allied governments to sign on to a new U.S.-led international mechanism.

European skepticism has also been fueled by who has been invited. Critics note that invitations have been extended to figures such as Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, which some officials see as a sign the project could blur lines between peacemaking and power politics.

Trump, for his part, has argued that traditional institutions have failed to deliver stability and that his approach can compel outcomes. He has also used social media to pressure foreign leaders, a style that supporters call direct but that opponents say is unpredictable and destabilizing.

The near-term risk for the White House is practical: without broad participation, the Board’s legitimacy and capacity to manage reconstruction, security arrangements and governance plans in Gaza could be questioned. A longer-term concern for allies is whether the United States is attempting to create a parallel system that sidelines established multilateral processes.

With European capitals hesitant and tensions rising inside NATO, analysts say Trump’s own tactics are now threatening to blunt the momentum he claimed at the start of the year. The coming weeks will show whether the administration can rebuild confidence—or whether the Gaza plan becomes collateral damage in a broader transatlantic clash.