EU Commissioner controversial attendance at Trump’s Board of Peace: a catalyst for EU internal rifts

In a move that has ignited fierce debate within European Union institutions, Commissioner Dubravka Šuica attended the inaugural meeting of U.S. President Donald Trump’s “Board of Peace” in Washington, D.C., on 19 February, as an observer focused on Gaza reconstruction efforts.

This decision, made by the European Commission reportedly without prior consultation with member states, has provoked outrage from several capitals, highlighting deep-seated divisions over EU foreign policy, transatlantic relations, and the bloc’s commitment to multilateralism.

While Šuica’s participation underscores the EU’s significant role as a donor to Palestinian causes, critics argue it legitimizes a U.S.-led initiative perceived as undermining the United Nations and favouring autocratic regimes.

Dubravka Šuica: from Croatian politics to EU Mediterranean envoy

Dubravka Šuica, a 68-year-old Croatian politician, has emerged as a pivotal figure in this diplomatic storm. A member of the center-right Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) and affiliated with the European People’s Party (EPP), Šuica’s career trajectory reflects a blend of local governance and international diplomacy.

Šuica’s selection for the Board of Peace meeting – rather than higher-profile figures like von der Leyen or EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas – has been interpreted by some as a deliberate signal of limited EU engagement.

Commission spokespeople have stressed that her attendance was confined to the Gaza-specific segment, with the EU not joining as a full member.

However, her statement that “Europe is not a bystander” has fuelled accusations that her presence lends undue credibility to Trump’s initiative.

Influential lobbying from the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change reportedly played a role in the Commission’s decision to engage, advocating for pragmatic involvement despite reservations.

The Board of Peace: Trump’s alternative to multilateralism

Launched by President Trump in January 2026, the Board of Peace aims to oversee Gaza’s post-conflict reconstruction and implement UN Security Council Resolution 2803, which calls for a ceasefire and rebuilding efforts.

However, the initiative has drawn widespread criticism for operating outside the UN framework, excluding the Palestinian Authority, and including controversial figures such as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – accused of war crimes – and leaders from autocratic states like Russia, Belarus, and EU member Hungary.

Funding concerns abound, with reports of $250 million diverted from the U.S. State Department and additional PAC contributions subsidizing participants.

Trump has framed the board as a “results-oriented” alternative to what he calls the UN’s inefficiencies, but detractors, including French President Emmanuel Macron, view it as an attempt to “dictate peace by lawbreakers.”

Countries like Spain have outright declined invitations, citing the absence of Palestinian representation and risks to multilateral norms.

The board’s composition – featuring “MAGA-fans and autocracies,” as Spanish MEP Javi López, European Parliament Vice President, put it – has amplified fears that it prioritizes geopolitical alliances over genuine peacebuilding.

Italian MEP Brando Benifei dismissed the participation as having “no added value,” warning against associating with “autocrats and dictators.”

Outrage and the Commission’s solo act

The Commission’s unilateral decision to send Šuica triggered immediate backlash during a February 18 meeting of EU ambassadors.

France’s Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot led the charge, asserting that the move violated EU treaties by encroaching on member states’ exclusive foreign policy prerogatives, which require unanimity.

“Member states were up in arms,” one diplomat reported, with France arguing that Šuica lacked a Council mandate.

Similar sentiments echoed from Spain, Belgium, Ireland, Slovenia, Portugal, Germany, Sweden, and Lithuania, who feared the attendance could be seen as EU endorsement of a flawed process.

Internal EU divisions: a fractured approach to transatlantic ties

This episode lays bare longstanding fissures within the EU on foreign policy dossiers, particularly U.S. relations under Trump. Western and Northern states, led by France and Germany, prioritize institutional integrity and multilateralism, viewing the Board as a threat to the UN and EU unity.

In contrast, Southern and Eastern members show greater pragmatism: Hungary and Bulgaria have joined as full members, while Italy, Romania, Greece, and Cyprus attend as observers, possibly driven by regional interests in Mediterranean stability and Gaza aid.

The Commission’s assertive stance – defended as necessary for “coordinated action and accountable governance” – reflects von der Leyen’s push for a more geopolitical EU, but it risks alienating capitals wary of overreach.

Broader divisions mirror debates over Trump-era policies: Pro-engagement voices, influenced by figures like Tony Blair, argue for dialogue to influence outcomes, while sceptics fear legitimizing isolationist or authoritarian tendencies.

Ultimately, this scandal reveals the EU’s struggle to balance unity with autonomy in a fragmented global order. As one X analyst noted, the board isn’t about peace but “auctioning American credibility” – a dynamic that tests whether the EU can speak with one voice or remain divided by national prerogatives.

Caption: US President Donald Trump (C) raises the gavel during the Board of Peace meeting at the Donald J. Trump US Institute of Peace in Washington, USA, 19 February 2026. Established by Donald Trump and led by the government of the United States, the Board of Peace (BoP) is a body tasked with overseeing the processes of the Gaza peace plan. EPA/ALESSANDRO DI MEO