Board of Peace
The inaugural meeting of the Board of Peace, a new international body launched in January, was held Feb. 19 in Washington.
The original aim of the Board of Peace was to oversee and facilitate the stabilization and end of conflict in Gaza. It has now expanded to address many global conflicts. The White House put out a statement addressing the new board and what its goals are back in January.
“The Board of Peace will play an essential role in fulfilling all 20 points of the president’s plan, providing strategic oversight, mobilizing international resources and ensuring accountability as Gaza transitions from conflict to peace and development,” the statement said.
According to the Guardian, over 60 leaders across the globe were invited to join the board but not without a fee. Permanent membership requires a $1 billion contribution. As of Feb. 19, approximately 24 countries have joined, including Arab nations like Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Vietnam.
More than a dozen countries are deliberating joining the board, including Russia and China. However, some notable U.S. allies have declined, such as the United Kingdom, France and Germany.
The Board of Peace, unlike the United Nations, is not a universal body but is established with a chairman-centered structure under President Donald Trump. As chairman, he has the authority to invite or exclude members, break ties and approve or veto any resolutions and votes.
According to WRAL News, the U.S. will be pledging $10 billion for the Board of Peace, however, there was no specification on what the money will be used for.
“The Board of Peace is showing how a better future can be built, starting right here in this room,” Trump said.
Vice President JD Vance also advocated for the Board of Peace, saying it is a win for the U.S.
“The reason that we’re here today is yes to save lives and yes to promote peace, but this creates prosperity for the American people,” Vance said.
President Trump Raises Global Tariffs
Trump announced Friday, Feb. 20 on Truth Social that he is increasing the global tariff rate on imports from 10% to 15%, the maximum allowed under current U.S. trade law, following a major Supreme Court ruling that struck down much of his tariff program.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3, Feb. 20 that Trump had exceeded his authority by using emergency powers, specifically the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, to impose wide-ranging tariffs without explicit congressional approval. The court held that tariff powers reside with Congress, not the president.
In response, Trump quickly pivoted to a different trade law, Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows temporary tariffs of up to 15% with limited congressional involvement. On Friday, Feb. 20, he announced a 10% global tariff under that statute; on Saturday, he said he would raise the rate to the law’s maximum.
In his post on Truth Social, Trump explained the decision to invoke this law.
“Based on a thorough, detailed, and complete review of the ridiculous, poorly written, and extraordinary anti-American decision on Tariffs issued yesterday … please let this statement serve to represent that I, as President of the United States of America, will be, effective immediately, raising the 10% Worldwide Tariff on Countries,” Trump said.
Under the statute Trump cited, the temporary 15% tariff can remain in effect for up to 150 days unless extended by Congress.
According to The National, Trump said, “The Trump administration will determine and issue the new and legally permissible tariffs.”
The Supreme Court’s ruling potentially affects more than $175 billion in tariff revenue collected under the invalidated program, according to Investing.com. Some importers may seek refunds for tariffs paid under the struck-down authority.
Trump’s broader tariff strategy has been a hallmark of his trade policy, aimed at reducing trade deficits and protecting U.S. industries. Some analysts say his aggressive use of tariffs has disrupted supply chains and increased costs for U.S. consumers, prompting calls for clearer legal grounding. Observers note that while the 15% levy is legally permissible under current law, its long-term durability may require congressional action.
As the new tariff framework takes effect, lawmakers and business groups are expected to monitor its impact, and some may push for legislative changes to clarify the executive branch’s trade authorities.
Clardy is the off-campus news editor for the Liberty Champion.