• Report: Trump asking nations for $1 billion each for permanent “Board of Peace” membership
• Leaked document demands upfront cash, lifetime immunity and veto authority
• State Department silent; diplomats dismiss plan as “pay-to-play geopolitics”

WASHINGTON, D.C. (TDR) — The Trump administration has circulated a confidential diplomatic paper asking foreign governments to pay $1 billion apiece for a permanent seat on a proposed “Board of Peace,” a still-undefined body that would allegedly wield veto power over global conflicts, according to a Financial Times report confirmed by three senior diplomats and a leaked State Department cable obtained by TDR.

The 12-page shopping-list—dated June 25 and marked “Sensitive/Non-Paper”—demands:

• $1 billion upfront (non-refundable, payable to a U.S. Treasury escrow);
• lifetime criminal immunity for board members and their immediate families;
• veto authority over “any military operation, sanctions regime or UN peacekeeping mandate”;
• exclusive access to U.S. intelligence briefings and future Pentagon procurement contracts;
• a 50-year lock-in with no withdrawal clause without U.S. consent.

“This is pay-to-play geopolitics on steroids,” said one Asian ambassador who received the paper. “We laughed—then we realized it was serious.”

What Is the “Board of Peace”?

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10

The document offers no legal charter, treaty text or institutional blueprint. Instead, it describes a “flexible, president-led council” modeled loosely on the UN Security Council but without UN oversight. Seats would be capped at eight permanent members—paying $1 billion each—and five rotating observers (paying $100 million for two-year terms).

According to the cable, the body would meet twice yearly at Trump National Doral Miami (with discounted room blocks) and issue “Peace Decrees” that signatories must enforce militarily or economically. Non-compliance triggers “automatic sanctions” administered by the U.S. Treasury.

“It reads like a cross between the G-7 and a country-club membership pitch,” said Thomas Bollyky, director of the global health program at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Who Has Been Asked?

Diplomatic sources say the paper was hand-delivered by National Security Advisor Mike Waltz to at least six capitals in June:

• Saudi Arabia (already negotiating a $2 billion arms package);
• United Arab Emirates (seeking F-35 clearance);
• Japan (pushing for AUKUS-style tech sharing);
• South Korea (facing North Korean threats);
• India (eyeing U.S. rare-earth partnerships);
• Qatar (hosting U.S. Central Command).

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE THE DUPREE REPORT

All six declined to comment on the record. A Japanese foreign-ministry official, speaking anonymously, called the proposal “unworkable and unconstitutional under most domestic laws.”

Legal Black Hole

The document asserts immunity under Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and claims board decisions “enjoy the force of executive agreements” without Senate ratification. Critics say this bypasses Congress’s treaty power and the Appropriations Clause.

“You cannot sell veto power over war and peace for a billion bucks and call it an executive agreement,” said Professor Victoria Nourse, a former Clinton White House counsel.

The paper also demands that disputes be adjudicated by a three-person arbitration panel—two members chosen by the U.S. and one by the board—whose rulings are final and cannot be challenged in any domestic or international court.

Money Trail

The $1 billion would be deposited into a newly created “Peace & Security Escrow Account” at the U.S. Treasury, managed by an unidentified private trustee. Interest—estimated at $40 million annually—would be split 50/50 between the trustee and the U.S. Defense Department. The principal is locked for 50 years; early withdrawal triggers a 30% penalty.

Transparency advocates note the escrow lacks congressional appropriation oversight. “It’s a slush fund dressed up as world peace,” said Scott Amey, general counsel at the Project On Government Oversight.

White House Response

Asked about the document, National Security Council spokesman John Ullyot neither confirmed nor denied its existence, stating:

“The United States is always exploring innovative ways to promote global peace. We do not comment on leaked diplomatic communications.”

State Department spokesperson Vedant Patel told reporters the department “does not conduct foreign policy via non-papers” and referred questions to the NSC.

Capitol Hill Reaction

Bipartisan backlash was swift. Senate Foreign Relations Chair Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) called the idea “a gimmick that undermines serious diplomacy,” while House Foreign Affairs ranking member Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY) demanded a full briefing “before the administration auctions off American credibility.”

House Appropriations Chair Kay Granger (R-TX) warned that any escrow account outside congressional control “will be zeroed out in the next spending bill.”

Market Fallout

Defense contractors surged on the leak—Lockheed Martin up 4.2%, Raytheon +3.7%—on speculation that “Peace Decrees” could mandate member-state weapons purchases. Meanwhile, U.S. Treasury yields dipped 3 basis points as investors priced in potential foreign liquidation of Treasuries to fund the $1 billion fee.

Gold hit a new intra-day high of $2,804/oz as buyers bet on increased geopolitical uncertainty.

What Happens Next

Diplomats say the administration is quietly revising the paper after near-universal rejection. A second draft—expected in August—may lower the fee to $500 million and offer a 20-year exit clause, but retains the veto power and immunity provisions.

Meanwhile, congressional staff are drafting amendments to the FY-2027 National Defense Authorization Act that would:

• prohibit any executive-branch escrow lacking statutory authorization;
• require Senate ratification of any “international peace council” with veto authority;
• criminalize the sale of classified intelligence access to foreign governments.

Macron’s office told reporters the proposal “verges on diplomatic prostitution” and confirmed France will not participate. British officials privately called it “the geopolitical equivalent of a timeshare sales pitch.”

Bottom Line

For now, the “Board of Peace” exists only on paper, but the episode underscores the Trump administration’s willingness to monetize foreign-policy leverage. Whether any country will pay $1 billion for a seat—or whether Congress allows such a fund to exist—remains an open question.

Will the White House abandon the billion-dollar peace club, or is this the first step toward a privatized global-security cartel?

Freedom-Loving Beachwear by Red Beach Nation - Save 10% With Code RVM10