Donald Trump’s Influence at Davos Signals Decline of the United Nations

The discussions among the global elite regarding Trump's desire to dominate the world stage unfold in Davos, casting a shadow over the well-being of billions globally. This annual meeting attracts guests in private jets to a luxurious venue, where they indulge in lavish dinners, backslapping, and decisions that affect the fates of countless inhabitants around the planet.

The Citizen

21/01/2026 9:23pm

Original article: Donald Trump y Davos aceleran la agonía de la ONU

By Pablo Jofré Leal, Journalist and International Analyst

The actions taken by U.S. President Donald Trump in international politics highlight not only his hegemonic and arrogant approach but also his determination to deliver a fatal blow to what is often referred to as global governance (1).

In this context, particularly aimed at rendering the United Nations (UN) ineffective or making it even more compliant to Washington’s decisions, Trump seeks to marginalize the roles of the General Assembly, the UN Security Council, and its current Secretary-General, António Guterres, along with any successor who may follow.

On January 8, Trump announced the withdrawal of the United States from 66 international bodies (2), about half of which are affiliated with the UN. Many of these organizations, which Trump and his administration hold in disdain, are engaged in areas related to climate change—a reality the billionaire and current resident of the White House dismisses as merely a “leftist” invention.

According to Trump, these entities do not serve the interests of the United States and have ineffective and hostile agendas, meaning they do not faithfully comply with U.S. directives.

Trump’s personality, marked by megalomania, arrogance, and warlike tendencies, can be characterized as pathological narcissism. His approach to international relations has been defined not just by his National Security Strategy presented in late 2025 (3) but also by his unwavering aim to act as a global emperor among other roles.

He sees himself as a king in the United States, an interim president in besieged Venezuela, and a “Daddy” in Europe, publicly expressing intentions in early 2026 to unilaterally assume roles previously fulfilled by the UN, effectively positioning his country as the sole arbiter of governance concerning human rights and territorial sovereignty.

Trump also dictates how to deal with occupied, invaded, or colonized countries, deciding their fates and the potential uses of their lands. This has been evident in his numerous comments regarding Gaza, where he has endorsed crimes, occupation, colonization, and genocide against the Palestinian people by the Israeli regime.

While Trump does not explicitly claim the intent to officially assume the functions granted to the UN, his actions advocate for a behavior that practically replaces the international organizations established post-World War II, which his administration views as a constraint.

The blonde president believes that the White House should dictate international conflicts according to U.S. interests, positioning himself as the central figure.

In European media—where criticism is often veiled since the political and financial elite fear confronting Trump lest they face a barrage of threats—it is suggested that Trump’s aim is not so much to legally assume UN responsibilities but rather to construct a world order where the U.S. plays a predominant role, diminishing traditional multilateral institutions to their bare minimum. Europe seeks to minimize its reality of becoming a mere backyard.

In my view, Trump wishes to ignite the world. He is a dangerously unhinged egotist. For instance, in a letter sent to Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, Donald Trump claims that having not received the Nobel Peace Prize, he no longer feels obligated to pursue this objective.

In this correspondence, he questioned Norway’s decision and tied it to his desire to take control of Greenland, insisting that while peace “will remain paramount,” he can now focus on what is good and right for the United States.

He further asserted his supposed right over Greenland: “I have done more for NATO than anyone since its founding, and now NATO should do something for the United States. The world will not be safe unless we have total and complete control of Greenland,” Trump declared in his note to Støre.

The concept of respecting international law, adhering to national sovereignty and territorial integrity, and promoting multilateralism gives Trump hives. In response, the criticisms from his allies regarding Washington’s goal to use self-created mechanisms rather than traditional international forums like the UN General Assembly quietly surface. He has even named this new creation: the Council for Peace.

The contentious president, inherently combative, violent, and verbose, who does not hesitate to lie; the politician who supports wars and genocides, proposes establishing a Council for Peace. This is while he seeks to diminish the relevance of traditional multilateral institutions.

A Council designed as a platform for U.S. leadership, not for mediating global conflicts, which in no way serves as an alternative to the UN in terms of peace and security. It aims to impose U.S. criteria, not to mediate. Replacing the 193 member countries of the UN does not provide a governance alternative; it equates to imposing and advancing toward a global dictatorship.

Trump’s attacks on the UN are incessant. At the end of 2025, he openly declared that “perhaps the United States has become the real UN” (4), criticizing the international organization for its ineffectiveness in stopping and resolving wars, such as the conflict between NATO and Russia. This marks an undeniably hypocritical statement given that the U.S. has played a central role in fueling a hybrid war against the Russian Federation, utilizing NATO and the Ukrainian regime as a proxy.

Trump’s invective regarding Ukraine is deeply self-serving and false. It is a sordid diatribe that seeks to mask Washington’s pivotal role in much of the international conflict landscape.

Wherever one looks, one finds the hand and interests of the United States and its allies: the attack on Venezuela and the kidnapping of its President; the maximum pressure policy against Cuba; destabilizing and criminal actions against the Islamic Republic of Iran, which have resulted in the support in arms for terrorist groups, cognitive warfare efforts, and public declarations calling for the overthrow of the Iranian government.

This criminal call has justified the assassination of hundreds of civilians and police in Iranian society, the destruction of government buildings, attacks on hospitals and residential areas, and fires set to mosques. A terrorist operation heavily repudiated by the Iranian people, who took to the streets in their millions to defend their country, their system, and their right to sovereignty.

Adding to this is support for a genocidal policy carried out by heavily armed militias in Darfur and El Fasher in Sudan, backed by the United Arab Emirates with American approval and Israeli support. The threats against Niger, Burkina Faso, and Mali aim at curtailing their processes for reaffirming political and economic self-determination and sovereignty. There are also threatening declarations directed at neighboring Canada and the government of Mexico under Claudia Sheinbaum, as well as threats against Brazil’s Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Colombia’s Gustavo Petro.

The threats and commercial pressures against the People’s Republic of China and even direct threats against a European ally like Denmark, which is told it must deliver Greenland because Washington deems it “vital for its national security,” showcase the U.S. as a nation responsible for unprecedented aggressions, destabilizations, coups, and invasions throughout its relatively short history.

The United States is led by a dangerous malignant narcissist (5), a mendacious and pretentious figure who finds his kindred spirits in other dangerously influential characters like Benzion Mileikowsky (better known as Benjamin Netanyahu), Argentina’s Javier Milei, suspected drug trafficker, Ecuador’s Daniel Noboa, and aspiring dictator Nayib Bukele of El Salvador, as well as monarchies that carry out Washington’s orders, including those of Morocco, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.

Governments like Japan, South Korea, Australia, and Taiwan are eager to ramp up pressure against China. These allies also support the notion that the world needs a new governance model, one to be led by Trump.

Davos and the Annual Theater of the Powerful

The discussions among the global elite concerning Trump’s aspirations for dominance unfold in Davos. Nothing positive will emerge from there for the world’s people. It is an event where attendees arrive via private jets to a luxury venue, engaging in lavish dinners and celebrations to pat each other on the back while determining the fates of billions.

In Davos, “the rich” and those of middling status – one thousand attendees from 130 countries – gather to listen and even applaud vehement speeches against the master who dominates them and the perils that lie ahead.

“A Spirit of Dialogue” is the theme for 2026, aiming to address global cooperation, particularly focusing on technology and AI, economic policies, sustainability, and investment in people for building prosperity in a fragmented world. Discussions revolve around how to foster growth and better confront economic uncertainty and geopolitical tensions. The prosperity of people is not on the menu, only that of multinational corporations, billion-dollar fortunes, and energy companies.

The UN is not a central part of these discussions as it remains nothing more than a zombie: a living dead, even if its flag serves as a backdrop against the snowy mountains of this luxurious center in the Grisons Canton of German-speaking Switzerland.

The annual Davos Forum (held since 1971) is a celebration for the wealthy and those who serve them, holding significant political positions. But, I insist, nothing beneficial will come from this for the Global South. These gatherings are merely PR campaigns, a showcase of image laundering, reaffirming what we already know. As Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney stated, the global order based on U.S. norms has reached its end (6).

“Today, I will speak about the breakdown of the world order, the end of the pleasant fiction, and the dawn of a brutal reality,” Carney asserted. “Let me be direct: we are in the midst of a breakdown, not a transition… Mid-level powers must act together because if you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu.”

This apparent straightforwardness, however, recycles the same narratives: How to foster good relations between major powers and those like Canada that consider themselves mid-tier powers. The appeal is not for the world, but for those who have enjoyed the privileges of power and feel their status threatened.

What about the rest of the planet? The other 90% of the world’s countries? For them, there isn’t even a pleasant fiction; instead, in the 21st century, they will continue to fight for their right to sovereignty and self-determination. After Davos concludes, the UN will still be absent, Trump will keep issuing threats, and the specter of the blonde billionaire will hang over our heads like the sword of Damocles.

Paraphrasing a famous song by Joan Manuel Serrat, after Davos, “it’s over, the sun tells us that the end has come. For one night, it was forgotten that each one is their own. And with the hangover comes the poor back to their poverty. The rich returns to their wealth. And the priest returns to his masses. Good and evil awaken, the poor fox to the portal, the rich fox to the rosebush, and the miser to his riches.”

Pablo Jofré Leal
Journalist and International Analyst
Article for Hispantv.

NOTES