ÃÀÅ®¸£ÀûµçÓ°ÔºÎçÒ¹

The proposed US-led "Board of Peace" could further weaken the United Nations, but according to O’Malley, however, the proposal is not necessarily a response to the UN’s challenges. This is very much about the MAGA agenda in foreign policy of the Trump administration and strengthening US influence amid growing competition with Russia and China. The plan signals a return to great-power rivalry and seeks to institutionalise American leadership within a structure more closely aligned with US interests. O’Malley also describes it as a personal ego project for Trump, who would hold a lifelong chairmanship and veto power over all major decisions—thereby undermining any genuine value the institution might otherwise have.

O’Malley notes that the UN’s influence has waxed and waned over its 81-year history, with 192 member states (193 with the US included) still committed to its principles. However, she warns that major powers disengaging from multilateral institutions creates power vacuums. While there is global support for UN reform, concrete action is lacking, and she highlights Article 109—a long-ignored provision calling for decadal reform conferences—as a critical but unused tool for revitalisation.

She advocates for empowering the UN General Assembly, which better reflects global opinion—such as on Gaza and Ukraine—compared to the paralysed Security Council. Yet, reforming the UN Charter is challenging, as it requires unanimous approval from the P-5, who resist changes that reduce their influence. O’Malley frames current Global South activism as a continuation of historical patterns, not a sudden shift, and argues that US frustration with the Global South stems from the inability to automatically control these countries who can direct the international agenda when they act together. Ultimately, she concludes that the Board of Peace is less about countering the Global South and more about entrenching US power under Trump’s agenda.