Perpetuating a legacy, never mind the cost

Donald Trump’s frustration at not leaving behind a valid legacy is growing as realization dawns that this is his last Presidency. His exasperation at not having been awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, which would match the accomplishments of his nemesis, Barack Obama, has become a global joke. However, for him, it remains an obsession. It was on display when the Venezuelan opposition leader, María Machado, gifted him her award and he childishly decided to keep it.

The Nobel Peace Centre responded, “a medal can change owners, but the title of a Nobel peace prize laureate cannot.” Such was his irritation at not being nominated for the 2025 Peace prize for his fake claims, despite recommendations from Pakistan and Israel, that he wrote a letter to the Norwegian PM tying his Greenland demand to the Nobel award. He wrote, “I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, but can now think about what is good and proper for the US.” Memes on Trump and the Nobel award have flooded social media. It was in Davos that Trump’s tone on Greenland mellowed. He ruled out use of force while seeking unlimited access.

Advertisement

His deriding Europe and its leaders continued. Europe, for once, decided to fight back. The EU parliament blocked the US trade deal aimed at reducing tariffs on US imports. For Trump, gaining control over Greenland is ensuring a lasting legacy. Trump, soon after challenging Europe on Greenland, unleashed his next legacy missile, the Board of Peace (BoP). The board was instituted as part of Trump’s 20-point Gaza Peace Plan to manage the second phase of the Gaza peace process. However, over a period of time, its concept appears to have grown larger, aimed at creating an organization more powerful than the UN. He invited dozens of countries to join the BoP. Interestingly, the BoP’s charter does not include Gaza, the region for which it was originally designed.

Chapter 1 of the charter mentions, “(the BoP) 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.” This implies that it would be involved in restoring peace in global conflict zones, challenging the authority of the UN. Article 3.2 of the charter states, “Donald Trump shall serve as inaugural Chairman of the BoP.” This conveys that even after remitting office, he will continue to serve as chairman, as the charter mentions his name, not position. Any future US President could only serve as a member of the BoP, that too, on the invitation of Trump.

It also states that all nations would serve for three years and their extension would be ‘subject to renewal by the Chairman,’ implying Trump would retain control. Nations seeking a permanent membership would need to pay USD 1 Billion. The next article, 3.3 states, “The Chairman shall at all times designate a successor for the role of Chairman.” Thus Trump would ensure that his nominee would be an individual of his choice, possibly from his family, thereby ensuring that his family retains control. Ensuring he has unquestioned powers, Article 4.1 mentions, “The Executive Board shall be selected by the Chairman and consist of leaders of global stature,” implying that heads of state, forming part of the board, would have limited say.

Fearing that rejection by world leaders of the BoP would be an affront to his authority, Trump has begun targeting them by threat of tariffs in case they refuse. The first to face this warning was French President Emmanuel Macron. On hearing that he is unlikely to accept his offer, Trump threatened France with tariffs and mocked Macron in Davos. With almost no western nation or rising power accepting the invite, Trump’s frustration is only likely to increase. Representatives from about 20 nations, largely Middle East and a few others, including Pakistan, attended the signing ceremony in Davos. No G7 or European nation accepted the invite nor were they present.

India remains non-committal. France mentioned in its rejection statement, “(BoP) raises major questions, particularly regarding respect for the principles and structure of the UN.” Trump displayed that the BoP is his personal fiefdom by withdrawing the invitation to Canada because of PM Mark Carney’s powerful speech criticizing the US at Davos. The BoP will give Trump relevance and power even after his Presidential tenure. This is the reason he will pressure nations to join. An egoistic Trump is bound to carry a grudge against those who refuse. On being questioned on whether BoP would replace the UN, Trump mentioned, “Well it might. The UN just hasn’t been very helpful.” Seeking to be the President who concentrated on national security and US interests, Trump began questioning the British decision to hand back the Chagos Island chain to Mauritius.

Under the USD 4.6 billion agreement inked last year, the US and UK would retain control over Diego Garcia, which hosts a major military base. Interestingly, before the deal was signed, the UK PM discussed it with Trump. Instead of challenging it then, Trump stated, “I think we’ll be inclined to go along with your country (UK).” Marc Rubio, the US foreign secretary, also accepted the agreement. It appears to challenge the EU for not backing his Greenland demand. Questioning the Chagos deal, Trump mentioned on social media, “The UK giving away extremely important land is an act of GREAT STUPIDITY, and is another in a very long line of National Security reasons why Greenland has to be acquired.”

To defend his U-turn, Trump quoted threats from Russia and China, linking Chagos to Greenland, which is half a world away. Trump’s turnaround has forced the UK to stall debate on the agreement in its Parliament. Trump wants to leave behind a legacy as the President who restored domination over the Americas and gained control over territories essential for US security. In a January 2026 interview to the New York Times on what checks exist on his authority Trump responded, “My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me. I don’t need international law.” This statement displays the mentality of a desperate leader heading the world’s most powerful nation who believes in personal intuition rather than diplomacy, and will stop at nothing to build his legacy even at the cost of ruining global order and global institutions.

(The writer is a retired Major-General of the Indian Army.)