The $7 billion in international financial pledges announced by U.S. President Donald Trump during the first meeting of the 'Gaza Council' serves as a crucial benchmark for the international community's ability to convert promises into substantive action. Given the ongoing Israeli bombardment of Gaza and the current lack of an effective Palestinian negotiating stance, there are pressing questions regarding whether these financial resources will indeed contribute to lasting peace. A recent episode of the 'From Washington' program gathered insights from three political experts regarding the implications of this newly established council, which included around 20 countries under the 'Peace Council' framework.

Former CIA director of counterterrorism and the Middle East, Bernard Hudson, assessed that the current formation of the council functions more as a 'platform and façade' than a policy-driven institution. He articulated that a major challenge for this initiative revolves around obtaining commitments for international stabilization forces, particularly given the potential risks any country would face in deploying its troops to this volatile region. Additionally, tensions with Iran could further complicate and undermine the broader efforts to achieve peace in Gaza.

Hudson cautioned that the disarmament of armed factions in Gaza will likely be a lengthy process, potentially taking months at best, and cannot occur in isolation from a comprehensive and permanent ceasefire. This perspective contrasts sharply with that of a former military officer, suggesting a divide in opinion on how best to move toward peace in the region and the challenges that lie ahead.