The Vatican has declined an invitation to participate in a new initiative spearheaded by former US President Donald Trump, known as the “Board of Peace.” The decision, announced on , underscores the Holy See’s firm belief that the United Nations remains the appropriate international body for managing global crises.
Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican’s Secretary of State, explained the decision, stating that the Vatican’s participation would be complicated by its unique status. The Holy See will not participate in the Board of Peace because of its particular nature, which is evidently not that of other states,
he said. The announcement follows an invitation extended in to Pope Leo XIV to join the board.
Trump initially conceived the “Board of Peace” as a mechanism to oversee governance in Gaza following recent conflict, but subsequently broadened its scope to encompass a wider range of global disputes. At least 19 countries have reportedly signed the founding charter of the initiative, including Argentina, Hungary, Saudi Arabia, Russia, and the United Arab Emirates, since its launch at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, in .
However, the Vatican maintains that the UN is currently entrusted with the responsibility of addressing international crises. For us, You’ll see… Some critical issues that should be resolved,
Cardinal Parolin stated. That is, at the international level, it is above all the UN that manages these crisis situations. What we have is one of the points on which we have insisted.
This position reflects a longstanding preference for multilateral solutions through established international institutions.
The Vatican’s decision also comes amidst a backdrop of outspoken criticism from Pope Leo XIV, the first US pontiff, regarding some of Trump’s policies. While the specific policies criticized have not been detailed in this instance, the Pope’s previous statements suggest a divergence in approaches to international relations and conflict resolution.
The “Board of Peace” has already generated controversy, with some observers expressing concern that it could potentially undermine the authority and effectiveness of the United Nations. Experts have noted that the initiative appears to be an attempt by the former US President to establish an alternative multilateral forum, bypassing the UN’s established structures and processes. This concern is amplified by Trump’s repeated criticisms of the UN as being unfit for purpose.
The Vatican’s rejection of the invitation is not simply a diplomatic formality. It signals a clear preference for the existing international order and a commitment to working within established multilateral frameworks. The Holy See’s influence extends beyond its territorial boundaries, and its stance carries weight within the international community, particularly in areas of humanitarian concern and conflict resolution.
While Trump claims the “Board of Peace” has already committed more than $5 billion to rebuilding Gaza, the Vatican’s decision highlights the complexities of navigating international diplomacy and the importance of adhering to established norms and institutions. The initiative’s long-term viability remains uncertain, particularly in light of the Vatican’s prominent refusal to participate and the cautious reactions from other nations.
The Vatican’s stance underscores a broader debate about the future of multilateralism and the role of international organizations in addressing global challenges. As new initiatives emerge, the question of whether they complement or compete with existing structures will continue to be a central theme in international relations. The decision by Pope Leo XIV to prioritize the UN reflects a belief in the enduring importance of collective action through established channels.
The rejection of the invitation does not preclude the Vatican from engaging in diplomatic efforts to address global crises. The Holy See continues to play an active role in promoting peace and reconciliation through various channels, including bilateral diplomacy and engagement with international organizations. However, it has clearly signaled that it will not lend its support to initiatives that it believes could undermine the UN’s authority or effectiveness.
The situation remains fluid, and the future of the “Board of Peace” is uncertain. However, the Vatican’s decision serves as a significant indicator of the challenges facing the initiative and the enduring importance of the United Nations in the global landscape. The coming months will likely reveal whether Trump can garner sufficient international support to make the “Board of Peace” a viable alternative to existing multilateral structures.
