February 19, 2026
Key Points
- At today’s Board of Peace meeting in Washington, nine member states pledged a combined $7 billion toward Gaza reconstruction, and five countries committed to deploying troops as part of the International Stabilization Force outlined in the Gaza peace plan. President Trump separately announced a U.S. pledge of $10 billion to the Board, without specifying intended uses.
- These commitments come amid mounting tension between the goals of Phase Two of the Gaza ceasefire — demilitarization, technocratic governance, and stabilization — and sustained militant activity by Hamas and other armed groups.
- Since the ceasefire took effect last October, Hamas has conducted repeated armed incursions, tunnel operations, and direct attacks on IDF forces, while publicly rejecting disarmament and consolidating control over roughly half of Gaza’s territory.
- Hamas’s continued militancy sustains Israeli security concerns and remains the primary obstacle to Gaza’s stabilization and recovery. Israeli military operations, though frequently the focus of press coverage, have largely occurred in response to provocations, threats, or ceasefire violations.
- Palestinians are bearing the heaviest costs. Hamas’s refusal to disarm is stalling reconstruction, obstructing governance reform, and complicating humanitarian operations — including through the exploitation of civilian infrastructure such as hospitals. Absent progress on demilitarization, both Israeli security objectives and Palestinian stabilization efforts remain out of reach.
Strategic Context
The launch of Phase Two followed two major developments: the return of all hostages to Israel and the reopening of the Rafah Border Crossing. This phase is intended to shift Gaza from active conflict toward demilitarization, including the removal of Hamas weapons, munitions, and tunnels, and to establish structured civilian administration.
However, Hamas has rejected full disarmament and is now asserting that such requirements were not part of the ceasefire framework, creating a major disconnect between the peace plan’s objectives and Hamas’s actions on the ground. Hamas’s posture carries implications beyond Israeli security. The continuation of militant infrastructure, weapons movement, and ceasefire violations is hindering reconstruction, delaying governance reforms, and impeding efforts to improve living conditions for Palestinians.
Patterns of Hamas Noncompliance
Reporting since the ceasefire agreement was reached last October points to several recurring patterns of Hamas noncompliance, including:
Armed Activity Near Israeli Forces
Multiple incidents involved armed operatives knowingly approaching or crossing the Yellow Line (which splits Gaza between areas controlled by Israel and Hamas) near Israeli forces in northern, central, and southern Gaza.
Continued Use of Tunnel Infrastructure
Reports of terrorists emerging from tunnels, along with the detention of a senior Hamas East Rafah Battalion commander attempting to flee via Gaza’s underground routes, indicate Hamas’s military mobility and infrastructure remain intact.
Weaponization of Civilian and Humanitarian Infrastructure
Drone footage released by the IDF showed Hamas operatives using ambulances to transport fighters and weapons from a hospital to a school in the Jabaliya area of northern Gaza, which complicates humanitarian operations and increases risks to civilians receiving treatment at the hospital.
Escalatory Dynamics
Recent attacks near the Yellow Line, including the shooting that seriously wounded an IDF reservist officer, underscore how sustained low-level violations can destabilize the ceasefire and trigger retaliatory military responses.
Why This Matters for Democrats
- Hamas’s refusal to disarm most acutely affects Palestinian civilians, leaving them in a Gaza that struggles to move from war toward stability and recovery. Phase Two was designed to unlock reconstruction, stabilize governance, and enable a shift toward rebuilding Palestinian livelihoods. Yet the persistence of Hamas and other armed groups, weapons flows, and militant infrastructure continues to delay these goals. Israeli retaliatory actions in response to provocations complicate ongoing diplomatic negotiations.
- Reconstruction efforts remain fragile, and investments in housing, utilities, and public services are delayed as security conditions remain uncertain. The Trump Administration and several Gulf Arab states, including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Bahrain, have said publicly that they are reluctant to commit major financial support essential for Gaza’s post-war reconstruction unless Hamas is disarmed and excluded from governing roles in Gaza. President Trump reiterated this point at the Board of Peace meeting today.
- Governance reform is similarly constrained, inhibiting the development of accountable governance that Palestinians need for long-term stability. The technocratic National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG) will face safety concerns once it arrives in the Strip, as well as administrative challenges as Hamas maintains its coercive authority and ability to influence, pressure, or simply override it.
- It will be impossible for humanitarian aid to reach its full potential while Hamas controls nearly half of Gaza and 90 percent of the population. While assistance into Gaza has increased significantly since the ceasefire, demand still outpaces supply and there are continued reports of Hamas hindering or diverting the aid. Palestinians ultimately bear the costs of slower assistance and diminished services.
- Most importantly, the absence of demilitarization sustains the risk of renewed conflict. As long as Hamas retains its weapons, Gaza’s civilian population remains vulnerable to intimidation, displacement, and further cycles of escalation and economic disruption. Hamas’s actions are directly at odds with efforts to improve Palestinian livelihoods and create the conditions for durable recovery.
Implications for Phase Two
Phase Two was conceived as the bridge between active conflict and sustainable recovery; a period in which violence would recede, governance structures would begin to normalize, and reconstruction could accelerate. Instead, Hamas’s refusal to disarm is creating a cycle of instability that places these objectives increasingly out of reach.
Continued armed provocations and the preservation of militant infrastructure sustain Israeli threat perceptions, making it politically and militarily difficult for Israel to accept deeper concessions or security risks. Each violation, even if limited in scale, reinforces doubts about the ceasefire’s durability and increases the likelihood of retaliatory actions. This dynamic also shifts attention and resources away from civilian recovery and back toward security management.
At the same time, the absence of demilitarization deters international actors from fully committing to long-term reconstruction and governance initiatives. While President Trump has collected $7 billion in pledges from the Board of Peace, reconstruction is expected to cost $70 billion and donors will be reluctant to invest in projects vulnerable to destruction or diversion by Hamas. At the same time, the NCAG cannot meaningfully exert authority while Hamas retains coercive authority and military leverage.
The result is a stalled transition: Gaza remains suspended between war and recovery, with Palestinians bearing the consequences of delayed rebuilding, weakened institutions, and persistent insecurity. Without measurable progress toward demilitarization, Phase Two risks evolving from a pathway to stabilization into a holding pattern defined by recurring violations and fragile deterrence. Absent progress on demilitarization, both Israeli security objectives and Palestinian stabilization efforts remain out of reach.