Briefly

According to Axios, citing an unnamed U.S. official and diplomats from four countries, the U.S. administration plans to hold the first heads-of-state meeting under the Peace Council for the Gaza Strip on February 19. The official aim is to advance implementation of the second phase of the ceasefire and to hold a donor conference to raise funds for reconstruction.

"This will be the first meeting of the Peace Council and a fundraising conference for Gaza's reconstruction"

— unnamed U.S. official

What's on the agenda

The White House administration has reportedly already begun contacting dozens of countries to determine which leaders will be able to attend and to sort out logistics. A separate signal is the scheduled meeting between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the U.S. president on February 18, a day before the summit. Netanyahu accepted the invitation but has not yet signed the council's charter.

At the same time, mediators — Egypt, Qatar and Turkey — are conducting negotiations on elements of demilitarization, without which Israel says it cannot withdraw its forces or begin reconstruction.

Contradictions and structural risks

The initiative has already met with skepticism: when the Council was created at the Davos forum many Western partners did not join — partly because the charter grants its chair broad powers and provides for a one-person veto. This raises concerns about legitimacy and whether the Council will become a parallel body rather than cooperating with the UN Security Council.

In addition, there are differences between statements from the Israeli side (setting short deadlines for Hamas's disarmament) and the official position of the U.S. administration (which sees the process as longer and gradual), complicating the rapid implementation of the second phase of the ceasefire.

What this means for Ukraine

Ukraine has already stated that it will join the Peace Council only after its own war has ended, and mentions this institution in a 20-point draft peace plan. Why Kyiv should pay attention:

• Recovery model: financing and reconstruction management mechanisms for Gaza could set a precedent for future post-war programs in other hotspots, including Ukraine.
• Rules of the game: the Council's form and powers show who sets the rules — and whether they will protect the sovereignty of participating countries.
• Geopolitical signals: participation or refusal by key allies sends a signal about confidence in the institution; for Kyiv it is important that reconstruction not become a tool of political pressure on countries affected by aggression.

Conclusion

The planned date of February 19 is an indicator of intent but not a guarantee of an outcome: the project is still in its early stages, and key issues — demilitarization, legitimacy and financial architecture — remain unresolved. For Ukraine, the main priority is to ensure that international reconstruction mechanisms are transparent, multilateral and protect the interests of affected countries, rather than becoming tools of unilateral influence.

An open question: will the Peace Council turn into an effective reconstruction mechanism or into a political platform with opaque rules — and will international partners be able to strike a balance between rapid assistance and security guarantees for the entire community?