🔗 Share this article

Thhese days exhibit a very unique phenomenon: the inaugural US march of the babysitters. Their qualifications differ in their skills and traits, but they all possess the same objective – to prevent an Israeli breach, or even demolition, of the unstable truce. Since the war ended, there have been rare days without at least one of Donald Trump’s representatives on the territory. Just recently featured the arrival of a senior advisor, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all arriving to execute their roles.

The Israeli government occupies their time. In just a few days it executed a set of strikes in Gaza after the deaths of a pair of Israeli military personnel – leading, according to reports, in many of Palestinian fatalities. Multiple leaders called for a restart of the conflict, and the Knesset enacted a initial resolution to annex the occupied territories. The US response was somewhere between “no” and “hell no.”

However in several ways, the American government seems more concentrated on preserving the present, unstable phase of the peace than on progressing to the following: the rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip. When it comes to that, it appears the United States may have aspirations but few tangible strategies.

At present, it remains unclear at what point the planned multinational oversight committee will effectively begin operating, and the similar is true for the designated peacekeeping troops – or even the makeup of its soldiers. On Tuesday, Vance declared the US would not dictate the structure of the international contingent on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s administration continues to reject various proposals – as it did with the Turkish offer recently – what occurs next? There is also the opposite issue: who will determine whether the units supported by Israel are even interested in the assignment?

The issue of the duration it will need to neutralize the militant group is equally vague. “The aim in the administration is that the international security force is intends to now take the lead in disarming the organization,” said the official recently. “That’s may need some time.” Trump only reinforced the ambiguity, stating in an discussion on Sunday that there is no “hard” deadline for Hamas to demilitarize. So, theoretically, the unidentified participants of this still unformed international force could enter the territory while Hamas fighters continue to wield influence. Would they be confronting a governing body or a insurgent group? These represent only some of the questions arising. Some might wonder what the result will be for average Palestinians under current conditions, with Hamas carrying on to focus on its own political rivals and opposition.

Latest events have afresh emphasized the omissions of Israeli media coverage on each side of the Gaza frontier. Each publication seeks to scrutinize every possible aspect of Hamas’s breaches of the truce. And, usually, the fact that the organization has been hindering the return of the bodies of slain Israeli hostages has taken over the coverage.

By contrast, coverage of non-combatant fatalities in Gaza caused by Israeli strikes has garnered minimal notice – if at all. Consider the Israeli retaliatory actions after Sunday’s southern Gaza event, in which a pair of soldiers were killed. While local authorities reported 44 casualties, Israeli television commentators questioned the “limited answer,” which targeted solely facilities.

This is nothing new. Over the recent weekend, the information bureau alleged Israeli forces of breaking the ceasefire with the group 47 times since the truce came into effect, causing the death of dozens of Palestinians and harming another 143. The assertion seemed irrelevant to most Israeli reporting – it was merely ignored. That included reports that eleven members of a local family were fatally shot by Israeli troops recently.

The rescue organization stated the individuals had been attempting to go back to their dwelling in the Zeitoun neighbourhood of the city when the vehicle they were in was attacked for allegedly crossing the “boundary” that demarcates territories under Israeli military authority. That yellow line is invisible to the human eye and appears solely on maps and in authoritative records – not always available to ordinary individuals in the region.

Yet this occurrence barely rated a reference in Israeli media. A major outlet covered it in passing on its online platform, citing an Israeli military spokesperson who stated that after a suspicious transport was spotted, soldiers discharged warning shots towards it, “but the vehicle kept to move toward the troops in a manner that created an imminent threat to them. The soldiers shot to neutralize the danger, in compliance with the agreement.” Zero fatalities were reported.

Amid such framing, it is no surprise numerous Israelis believe Hamas solely is to blame for infringing the truce. This view threatens prompting calls for a more aggressive approach in Gaza.

Sooner or later – perhaps in the near future – it will no longer be adequate for all the president’s men to act as supervisors, advising Israel what to refrain from. They will {have to|need