The White House announced on Jan. 22 that President Donald Trump had “formally ratified” an international agreement, The Charter of the Board of Peace, for the purpose of establishing the Board of Peace as a new international organization. The White House announcement of the President’s action did not include the text of the Charter, but an Israeli newspaper has published a text here. According to Article 1 of the reported text of the Charter:
The Board of Peace is an international organization that seeks to promote stability, restore dependable and lawful governance, and secure enduring peace in areas affected or threatened by conflict. The Board of Peace shall undertake such peace-building functions in accordance with international law and as may be approved in accordance with this Charter, including the development and dissemination of best practices capable of being applied by all nations and communities seeking peace.
Many details of the planned work of the Board of Peace, and the anticipated role of the United States in it, are unknown at this stage. Following are some initial questions about the President’s action and the extent to which further action from Congress may be needed in connection with U.S. participation in the work of the Board if it is to continue on the basis of the reported text of the Charter.
In short, if the obligations of members are sufficiently limited in scope, it is conceivable that the executive could enter into the agreement establishing the Board of Peace without congressional authorization, though Congress would likely be needed for the United States to provide funds to the new organization. In addition, and if it is envisioned that the Board would be headquartered or operate in the United States, congressional authorization would be needed to provide the new organization with the privileges and immunities the Charter requires it to have in countries where it operates.
1. Can the United States join the Board of Peace without action by Congress?
Possibly. When the United States has joined significant public international organizations in the past, the agreements establishing the organizations have typically received some form of approval by Congress. In some cases, such as the UN Charter and the North Atlantic Treaty establishing NATO, the relevant agreements were entered into as treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate. In other cases, such as the World Bank and IMF and the World Health Organization, the relevant agreements were approved by a statute passed by both houses of Congress.
But the United States has also joined some organizations with limited scope and obligations without Congress approving the agreement establishing the organization. As one recent example, the United States joined the International Solar Alliance (ISA) in 2021, without Congressional action to approve the agreement establishing the organization. By the terms of the agreement establishing the ISA, participation by parties to the agreement in specific activities of the ISA is voluntary, and ISA members are not obligated to make financial contributions to the ISA’s work. (The Trump administration announced that the United States would withdraw from the ISA earlier this month).
Although the Trump administration has emphasized the significance of the envisioned work and mission of the Board of Peace, it may view the scope of the actual obligations of members of the Board of Peace to be limited in ways similar to those of the ISA. Of note, Article 2.2(b) of the Charter of the Board of Peace emphasizes limits on the requirements applicable to its member states, providing that:
Each Member State shall support and assist with Board of Peace operations consistent with their respective domestic legal authorities. Nothing in this Charter shall be construed to give the Board of Peace jurisdiction within the territory of Member States, or require Member States to participate in a particular peace-building mission, without their consent.
In addition, Article 5.1 of the Charter provides that “Funding for the expenses of the Board of Peace shall be through voluntary funding from Member States, other States, organizations, or other sources,” so it does not appear that membership in the Board of Peace would require the United States to make financial contributions to its budget.
To the extent that participation in the Board of Peace may not entail any specific obligations for the United States as a member, the Trump administration may believe that the President’s authorities for the conduct of foreign relations under Article II of the Constitution provide sufficient authority to allow the President to enter into the Board of Peace Charter without further Congressional action. This would be a plausible view based on the Charter as reported.
It’s worth noting that authorities available to the State Department to participate in international organizations include a restriction specifying that they do not provide “authority to accept membership for the United States in any international organization, or to participate in the activities of any international organization for more than one year without approval by the Congress.” See 22 USC 2672(a). The administration may not regard this restriction as relevant if it is not relying on State Department authorities as its basis for accepting membership in the Board of Peace.
2. Can the United States provide funds to the Board of Peace without action by Congress?
Likely not. Congressionally approved appropriations would be required for the United States to provide funds to the Board of Peace. It is not clear whether the Trump administration intends to provide funds to the Board. As noted above, the Board of Peace Charter specifies that funding for its expenses will come from voluntary contributions. States that provide $1 billion in funding to the Board of Peace during its first year are exempt from a three-year term limit that otherwise applies to Board of Peace members.
The Trump administration’s FY2026 budget request for Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs does not make any specific reference to funds being requested for contributions to the Board of Peace. Voluntary contributions to international organizations are often funded through the International Organizations and Programs (IO&P) account in the State Department budget. The Trump administration budget did not seek any funds for the IO&P account for FY2026; over $400 million had been appropriated to this account for Fiscal Year 2025, but these funds were later rescinded by Congress at the administration’s urging. It is not clear whether the administration might seek to use funds from other accounts to make contributions to the Board of Peace.
3. Can the Board of Peace conduct activities or operations in the United States without action by Congress? Would it enjoy privileges and immunities that other international organizations have?
Public international organizations typically seek a range of legal protections to facilitate their activities in the countries in which they operate. These privileges and immunities include tax exemptions; immunity from lawsuits in local courts; and immunities from searches, arrest or detention, and other legal process for the organization, its property and assets, and its personnel. These are typically established via agreements between the organization and states in which the organization operates, on a bilateral or multilateral basis. For example, the legal status of the United Nations in the United States is governed by both a bilateral agreement governing UN headquarters and a multilateral convention on the privileges and immunities of the UN.
Article 6(b) of the Charter of the Board of Peace provides that the Board shall ensure that privileges and immunities necessary for its work are to be established in the states in which it operates either via international agreements or through other measures taken by those states. Article 13.2 of the Charter similarly contemplates that the Board of Peace will establish a headquarters and field offices and negotiate agreements regarding their status with the relevant host states.
Congressional action would be required to allow the United States to extend privileges and immunities to the Board of Peace in connection with any presence or operations in the United States. An existing U.S. statute, the International Organizations Immunities Act, provides authority for the President to extend certain privileges and immunities to public international organizations “in which the United States participates pursuant to any treaty or under the authority of any Act of Congress authorizing such participation or making an appropriation for such participation.” See 22 USC 288. By its terms, this authority does not apply where U.S. participation in an organization has not been approved by treaty or by statute. In such a case, Congress would have to pass separate legislation authorizing the President to extend privileges and immunities to the organization.
The administration has not indicated to date where it expects the Board of Peace to be headquartered and conduct operations, and thus it’s not clear whether it is contemplated that the Board will have any presence or operations in the United States. If there is a desire for the Board to operate in the United States, Congress will need to pass legislation to allow privileges and immunities to be provided to the Board.
