Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Politics

Macron Rejects Trump’s Peace Council: $1bn per Seat and Risk of Undermining the UN

Bloomberg: France rejects Donald Trump's initiative, which offers a permanent seat for $1 billion and invites, among others, Putin and Lukashenko. We examine why this matters for the international order and what it could mean for Ukraine's security.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

January 19, 2026 · 2 min read

Macron Rejects Trump’s Peace Council: $1bn per Seat and Risk of Undermining the UN

What it's about

According to Bloomberg, French President Emmanuel Macron does not plan to join the so‑called Peace Council being proposed by the administration of Donald Trump. A draft charter reviewed by the agency stipulates that countries seeking a permanent seat must contribute at least $1 billion. The document also states that Trump is to become the first chair of the council and would have the authority to decide on membership.

Details

According to Bloomberg (18 January 2026), Trump has already invited a number of leaders, among them Argentina’s President Javier Milei and, sources say, Mark Carney. Unnamed interlocutors add that the charter could be signed at the Davos forum, but a number of “fine print” provisions have raised doubts among those invited.

Reaction from international actors

"We are currently studying all the details of this proposal, and in particular we hope for contacts with the American side to clarify all the nuances"

— Dmitry Peskov, Kremlin spokesman

"In the appeal to Belarus in the context of resolving the situation in Gaza, it is proposed that [Belarus] become a founder of the Peace Council, a new international organization"

— Ruslan Voronkov, spokesman for the Belarusian Foreign Ministry

According to agencies, Lukashenko reportedly received the proposal "positively" and said he was ready to take part in the council's work, while Paris decided not to join — primarily due to concerns that the initiative could go beyond the Gaza Strip issue and potentially undermine UN principles that France considers sacrosanct.

Why it matters — from Ukraine’s perspective

The initiative carries several key risks for the international order and security. First, a "paid membership" model would set a precedent for unequal representation on matters of peace and security — where influence is determined by contributions rather than an international mandate. Second, if the council includes leaders whom the West regards as revisionists or aggressors, it could become a tool for legitimizing actors who have undermined security norms. For Ukraine, such changes mean the risk of eroding a unified international front against aggression and complicating the diplomatic mechanisms on which our security relies.

What’s next

Macron’s decision is a signal to other European capitals: evaluate initiatives in terms of their impact on the collective security system and the authority of the UN. The key question now is whether other major players will follow him, and whether Trump can assemble a sufficient pool of supporters to give the Peace Council real weight. For Ukraine, this is not merely a diplomatic footnote but a matter of consolidating partners and preserving international tools of pressure and protection.

The episode involving a proposal that includes significant financial barriers and broad powers for the founder poses a simple question to Western partners: are they prepared to defend the rules that make the world predictable? The answer will help determine what the global arena looks like for Ukraine in the coming years.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026