President Trump will convene the inaugural meeting of his Board of Peace in Washington this week, an initiative the White House says aims to end the war in Gaza and jump-start reconstruction. The Biden-era U.N. Security Council debate on Gaza on Feb. 19, 2026, highlighted broad international concern over ongoing Israeli operations, the flow of humanitarian aid, and activity in the West Bank. U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Michael Waltz said the board will pledge $5 billion for Gaza’s rebuilding, even as the U.N. estimates reconstruction needs at more than $50 billion. The announcement comes alongside separate domestic reporting that the Justice Department has disclosed dozens of court-order violations in New Jersey related to immigration detentions and other administration developments.
- President Trump will host the Board of Peace’s first meeting in Washington on Thursday; U.S. envoy Michael Waltz said the board will pledge $5 billion toward Gaza reconstruction.
- The U.N. estimates Gaza rebuilding will exceed $50 billion; U.N. officials urged urgent de-escalation and full implementation of any plan.
- Over two dozen countries have joined the Board of Peace; key European powers including Britain, France and Germany have declined to participate.
- At the U.N. Security Council session on Feb. 19, 2026, diplomats criticized increased Israeli raids and settlement measures in the occupied West Bank.
- The Justice Department reported 52 violations across 547 New Jersey immigration cases, including 17 transfers done despite court orders.
- In New Jersey, most wrongly transferred detainees were returned, though filings leave six cases with unclear whereabouts or timelines for return.
- The Florida Legislature advanced a measure to rename the Palm Beach airport; the Florida House approved the bill 81-30 this week.
- The Trump Organization filed U.S. trademark applications for airport names including “President Donald J. Trump International Airport” and the code “DJT.”
Background
The Board of Peace is a U.S.-led initiative tied to President Trump’s 20-point Gaza plan, which calls for Hamas disarmament, demilitarization of the enclave, an international stabilization force and an eventual withdrawal of Israeli forces. The White House frames the board as an alternative to what it describes as ineffective prior approaches. The plan’s scope extends beyond Gaza into issues tied to the West Bank, prompting some allies to question whether the board duplicates or undermines existing multilateral mechanisms.
The Security Council has been wrestling with Gaza and West Bank developments for months, with U.N. and humanitarian officials warning of large-scale destruction and long-term reconstruction needs. The U.N. has placed the cost of rebuilding Gaza at more than $50 billion, a figure that dwarfs the $5 billion pledge announced by the U.S. envoy. Meanwhile, diplomats and civil-society leaders say reconstruction, security and governance reforms must be linked to protections for civilians and a political horizon for Palestinian self-governance.
Domestically, the administration is also contending with scrutiny from federal judges about compliance with court orders in immigration cases. A court-ordered accounting in the District of New Jersey found 52 instances of noncompliance across 547 cases since Dec. 5, many described in filings as inadvertent logistical errors but flagged by judges as systemic. Those legal disputes intersect with policy choices on detention capacity, deportation scheduling and coordination among agencies such as DHS and ICE.
Main Event
At the U.N. Security Council session on Feb. 19, 2026, several ambassadors raised sharp questions about Israel’s recent operations in Gaza and the West Bank and about the humanitarian access into Gaza. British Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper and the foreign ministers of Israel, Jordan, Egypt, Indonesia and Pakistan spoke at the high-level meeting, many of them scheduled to attend the Board of Peace in Washington the next day. Council discussions focused on both immediate security steps and the political viability of the U.S. plan.
Ambassador Michael Waltz defended the Board of Peace, saying that the Council had already adopted parts of the U.S. plan in November and that the board is a needed departure from past practice. Waltz told the Council the board would both press for demilitarization and offer financial support; he said the board expects to announce a $5 billion pledge at the Washington meeting. U.N. officials, however, cautioned that delivery and oversight of reconstruction funds would need broad buy-in to be effective.
Several diplomats warned that Israeli settlement policies and expanded raids in parts of the occupied West Bank risk undermining any stabilization effort. Palestinian U.N. representative Riyad Mansour told the Council he saw a pattern of dispossession and called on Israel to reverse course. Israel’s foreign minister, Gideon Saar, argued the Jewish people’s historical ties justified Israeli claims and said settlers in the West Bank would remain in any final arrangement.
On the sidelines, the U.N. said it would not send an institutional delegation to the Board of Peace meeting but confirmed it is providing humanitarian information and coordinating where possible. U.N. political and peacebuilding chief Rosemary DiCarlo urged implementation of any plan alongside immediate steps to de-escalate violence and protect civilians, warning that peace “on the ground” remained distant.
Analysis & Implications
The $5 billion pledge the board intends to mobilize is substantial politically but small compared with reconstructed needs estimated by the U.N. at more than $50 billion. That gap underscores a core challenge: short-term stabilization and humanitarian relief will not substitute for the deep, multi-year investment Gaza’s infrastructure, housing and services require. Without credible multilateral underwriting and transparent oversight, pledged funds may fall short of rebuilding goals or risk being politicized.
Strategically, the board’s expanded mandate — touching West Bank governance, security arrangements and regional diplomacy — has strained U.S. relations with several European allies who declined to join. Those governments cite concerns about creating parallel bodies to the U.N. Security Council and about sidelining long-standing diplomatic channels. If the board proceeds without broad international participation, its authority and the legitimacy of its interventions could be limited.
On the security front, disarming Hamas and demilitarizing Gaza remain highly fraught. Hamas has shown little willingness to surrender weaponry, and any international stabilization force would require clear rules of engagement, troop contributions and legal frameworks to operate effectively. Absent an enforceable political settlement or guarantees that address core grievances, security gains could be temporary.
Domestically, the Justice Department’s admission of dozens of court-order violations feeds a narrative of implementation lapses across parts of the administration. Judges demanding 100 percent compliance and setting firm deadlines increases judicial oversight of immigration operations, which could slow deportation schedules and change operational practices at ICE and DHS. Practically, courts may require real-time reporting or impose stricter remedies if noncompliance continues.
| Item | Figure |
|---|---|
| U.S. pledge (Board of Peace) | $5 billion |
| U.N. Gaza reconstruction estimate | More than $50 billion |
| Reported Justice Dept. violations (NJ) | 52 violations across 547 cases |
| Florida House vote on airport rename | 81–30 |
| Delaney Hall capacity | 1,000 beds |
The table puts the pledge in context: political signaling is clear, but the scale and operational demands of reconstruction and demilitarization exceed the initial funding and face complicated diplomatic and security constraints. On the domestic legal side, the counts and timelines in court filings will shape oversight and potential remedies moving forward.
Reactions & Quotes
U.S. envoy Michael Waltz framed the Board of Peace as a break with past approaches and as a practical alternative to the status quo. He emphasized choices facing policymakers and defended the board’s structure ahead of the Washington gathering.
“We had choices of Hamas continuing to control Gaza, and occupation of Gaza, or a new way.”
Michael Waltz, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.
Waltz’s comments were offered in response to Council criticism that the board’s mandate is unconventional. Supporters argue innovation is needed; critics say multilateral legitimacy matters for enforcement and funding.
U.N. political affairs chief Rosemary DiCarlo stressed that implementation must be comprehensive and coupled with immediate de-escalation efforts to protect civilians and preserve political space for a durable settlement.
“The comprehensive plan must be implemented fully, alongside urgent action to de-escalate and reverse the dangerous trajectory in the occupied West Bank.”
Rosemary DiCarlo, U.N. political and peacebuilding chief
DiCarlo’s statement highlighted the U.N.’s focus on civilian protection and the interconnectedness of Gaza and West Bank dynamics. U.N. officials signaled readiness to share humanitarian data but declined institutional participation in the board meeting.
On the judicial front, Judge Michael E. Farbiarz criticized government compliance and ordered further remedial steps after receiving the Justice Department’s accounting of violations. The court has demanded a plan to ensure full adherence to judicial orders in the district.
“Judicial orders should never be violated.”
Judge Michael E. Farbiarz (District of New Jersey)
Farbiarz praised parts of the administration’s filing as careful but instructed the government to explain how it will achieve 100 percent compliance, signaling potential further court intervention if lapses continue.
Unconfirmed
- It is not yet confirmed which countries will commit specific funding amounts beyond the $5 billion U.S. pledge mentioned by Ambassador Waltz.
- Details on the composition, mandate and rules of engagement for any proposed international stabilization force have not been finalized or publicly released.
- The extent to which the Trump Organization will monetize airport trademark applications through merchandise or licensing agreements remains unclear.
Bottom Line
The Board of Peace launch is a high-profile U.S. effort to shape Gaza’s post-conflict future, coupling a headline funding pledge with a broad political and security agenda that reaches into the West Bank. The $5 billion pledge is politically significant but falls far short of the U.N. reconstruction estimate of more than $50 billion, illustrating a tension between symbolic leadership and the long-term financial and logistical realities of rebuilding.
International buy-in, clarity about security arrangements, and robust oversight will determine whether the board can translate promises into durable results. Domestically, the Justice Department’s reported court-order violations have already triggered stricter judicial scrutiny, which may change operational practices across immigration enforcement and complicate the administration’s broader agenda.
For readers, the key questions to watch: who will fund reconstruction beyond the U.S. pledge, whether a stabilization force will be agreed and deployed, how settlement and West Bank policies evolve, and whether the courts will impose binding remedies to secure full compliance with judicial orders. These factors will shape the chances of lasting stability in Gaza and the region.
Sources
- The New York Times (news report)
- United Nations Press Office (official U.N. statements)
- U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey (federal court filings)