Washington Peace Council Established: Gaza Reconstruction Funds and New Geopolitical Developments

On the morning of February 19, U.S. President Trump presided over the inaugural meeting of the newly established Peace Council at the U.S. Institute of Peace in Washington, D.C. (now renamed Trump Tower). Representatives from over 40 countries attended the meeting. At the gathering, Trump announced that member states of the council had pledged $70 billion for the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip, with the United States providing an additional $100 billion. The meeting aimed to consolidate the Israel-Hamas ceasefire agreement reached last October and discuss post-war governance arrangements for Gaza. However, behind the massive financial commitments and plans for deploying international forces, it reflects ongoing adjustments in the Middle East's power structure, cracks in the relationship between the United States and its traditional allies, and the emergence of a new international coordination mechanism attempting to bypass the United Nations.

Composition of the Council: An Unconventional Diplomatic Assembly

From the list of attendees, the platform established by Trump exhibits distinct non-establishment characteristics. White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt revealed before the meeting that over 20 countries had confirmed their participation. In addition to U.S. allies such as India, Pakistan, and Argentina, the notable presence of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and representatives from countries like Vietnam drew particular attention. Traditional Western powers such as the United Kingdom, France, and Germany attended only as observers, openly expressing concerns that the council might include countries like Russia. Israel and several Arab nations are full members, while neither the Palestinian Authority nor Hamas secured a seat. This arrangement reflects the diplomatic inclination of the Trump administration: it prefers to collaborate with strong leaders or pragmatic governments that can engage with Washington on a one-on-one basis, showing limited interest in traditional alliances within multilateral frameworks.

The choice of the venue also conveys a political message. The meeting was held at the United States Institute of Peace, a building now known as Trump Tower. In his opening remarks, Trump specifically thanked Secretary of State Marco Rubio for taking over the building. This detail, along with the design of the council's emblem—a world map highlighting the Western Hemisphere surrounded by golden olive branches—was interpreted by British historian Mark Mazower as a reflection of Trump's penchant for ostentation and his worldview: everything centered on the United States, with other parts almost negligible. This symbolism sets the tone for the council's future operational model: it will be an elite club dominated by the United States and serving its specific strategic agenda, rather than an equal and consultative multilateral forum.

$1 Billion Reconstruction Plan and the "International Stabilization Force": The Uncertainty of Gaza's Future

The $17 billion fund announced by Trump ($7 billion in member pledges plus $10 billion in U.S. funding) was the most concrete outcome of the meeting. However, how this money will be used remains a question. Palestinian Ali Shash, appointed to lead the technocratic committee for Gaza under the supervision of the council, stated at the meeting: Most areas in the Gaza Strip are severely damaged and effectively destroyed, with humanitarian needs being extremely urgent. Under the current arrangements, reconstruction funds will not flow to the narrow coastal strip currently inhabited by Palestinians but will instead be allocated to over half of Gaza's territory controlled by the Israeli military. This effectively ties reconstruction efforts to Israeli security-controlled areas, setting the stage for the future political status of the territory.

Security arrangements are more complex. U.S. Army Major General Jasper Jeffers, appointed to command the international stabilization force, stated that the force will include 20,000 soldiers and 12,000 police officers. Indonesia, as the country with the largest Muslim population, has already planned to deploy troops. The newly appointed Director-General for Gaza Affairs of the Middle East Peace Council, Bulgarian diplomat and former UN Middle East envoy Nikolay Mladenov, reported that recruitment of Palestinian police for Gaza has begun, with 2,000 applicants so far for the upcoming new transitional Palestinian police force. The mission of this international force is not to patrol the streets of Gaza but to act as a buffer between Israel and Hamas. Its successful deployment depends on the most critical and fragile element of the Trump ceasefire plan: Hamas must be completely disarmed.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's demands are extremely tough: Hamas must abandon all weapons, including rockets, mortars, and rifles, even though Israel is arming other Palestinian militias fighting Hamas inside Gaza. This week, Israel also issued an ultimatum, demanding that Hamas surrender all weapons within 60 days, or else full-scale military operations will resume. This could completely overturn Trump's ceasefire agreement and restart a war that has already resulted in over 75,000 deaths and turned Gaza into ruins. All reconstruction plans under the council framework are built upon this highly unstable security foundation.

Impact on the United Nations System and Global Conflict Mediation

Trump's speech at the meeting clearly expressed the ambitions of this new institution. One day when I am no longer here, the United Nations will still exist, and I believe the United Nations will become even stronger. The Peace Council will almost oversee the United Nations, ensuring its proper functioning. He stated that the council will work very closely with the United Nations and help it address funding and facility issues. On the surface, these remarks support the United Nations, but in reality, they outline a vision for a new global governance architecture led by the United States, operating parallel to or even potentially above the United Nations.

This development has raised concerns in the international community. Just one day before the council meeting, the United Nations Security Council meeting on Gaza was deliberately held earlier so that diplomats could attend both meetings simultaneously. Such scheduling coordination cannot conceal the competitive relationship between the two. Since the Trump administration took office, it has maintained a skeptical and dismissive attitude toward multilateral institutions such as the United Nations. The establishment of the Peace Council can be seen as an institutional attempt to create alternative mechanisms and reshape the power to set international rules. The council started with the Gaza issue, but the treaty stipulates that it will assume a broader role in resolving global conflicts in the future. The statement by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is quite representative: Kyiv may consider joining the organization after the war, as the invited countries include Belarus and Russia. This reveals a fundamental contradiction of the council: it seeks to reflect inclusivity by embracing all parties, but its member selection criteria—particularly its open attitude toward countries like Russia—may undermine its moral authority and deepen divisions with traditional allies.

Regional Security and Great Power Rivalry: The Iranian Factor Behind the Ceasefire

Washington's peace declaration cannot conceal the ongoing tension in the Middle East. Trump acknowledged at the meeting that since the ceasefire took effect last October, there have still been small-scale conflicts in Gaza, with Palestinian health officials reporting over 600 deaths in Israeli attacks. However, he shifted the focus to the broader geopolitical chessboard, stating plainly that the achievement of the Gaza ceasefire was inseparable from the U.S.-Israel bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities last year. "So now we may have to take further action," he said, "or maybe not. Perhaps we will reach an agreement. You might find out in about 10 days."

This vague warning has drawn attention to the Persian Gulf. It suggests that the temporary calm in Gaza may be a lull before another larger-scale conflict. The Trump administration's linkage of the Gaza issue with its maximum pressure strategy against Iran has rendered any localized peace extremely fragile. Whether reconstruction and security deployment under the council framework can be sustained depends not only on whether Hamas disarms in Gaza but also on whether the dangerous standoff between Washington and Tehran escalates into direct military conflict. This interconnectedness means that peace in the Middle East is built on quicksand—a single miscalculation or provocation could cause the entire structure to collapse.

The diplomats returning from Washington brought back a commitment of immense financial scale yet ambiguous in detail, an institution with a novel structure but unstable foundations, and a vision of the Middle East's future profoundly shaped by great-power competition. The inaugural appearance of the Peace Council, rather than offering a clear solution, revealed the chaos and power struggles in the process of reshaping the international order in the post-United Nations era. The path to Gaza's reconstruction is destined to be long and arduous, with every link involved touching the most sensitive nerves of global geopolitics.