🔗 Share this article

Thhese times showcase a quite unusual situation: the first-ever US parade of the babysitters. Their attributes range in their qualifications and traits, but they all possess the same mission – to prevent an Israeli violation, or even demolition, of Gaza’s delicate truce. Since the hostilities concluded, there have been few occasions without at least one of the former president's delegates on the territory. Only recently saw the presence of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all coming to perform their duties.

Israel keeps them busy. In only a few days it executed a set of operations in Gaza after the deaths of two Israeli military troops – leading, based on accounts, in many of local casualties. Several ministers called for a resumption of the conflict, and the Knesset enacted a preliminary resolution to incorporate the West Bank. The American reaction was somehow ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in more than one sense, the Trump administration appears more concentrated on preserving the current, unstable stage of the truce than on progressing to the following: the rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip. When it comes to that, it seems the United States may have ambitions but little specific strategies.

For now, it remains unclear at what point the proposed global oversight committee will actually assume control, and the same applies to the appointed peacekeeping troops – or even the makeup of its soldiers. On a recent day, a US official declared the United States would not impose the membership of the international contingent on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s government keeps to refuse various proposals – as it did with the Turkish offer this week – what happens then? There is also the contrary issue: which party will determine whether the units supported by the Israelis are even prepared in the mission?

The question of the duration it will take to demilitarize the militant group is equally unclear. “Our hope in the leadership is that the global peacekeeping unit is will at this point assume responsibility in disarming Hamas,” remarked the official recently. “That’s going to take some time.” The former president only highlighted the lack of clarity, saying in an conversation a few days ago that there is no “rigid” deadline for Hamas to demilitarize. So, in theory, the unknown members of this not yet established international contingent could enter Gaza while the organization's members still remain in control. Would they be facing a administration or a insurgent group? These represent only some of the questions emerging. Some might question what the outcome will be for ordinary Palestinians as things stand, with the group continuing to focus on its own political rivals and critics.

Current incidents have yet again highlighted the blind spots of Israeli reporting on the two sides of the Gazan frontier. Every outlet seeks to scrutinize each potential perspective of the group's breaches of the peace. And, usually, the fact that the organization has been hindering the return of the remains of killed Israeli captives has monopolized the news.

Conversely, coverage of non-combatant fatalities in the region stemming from Israeli attacks has received minimal notice – if any. Take the Israeli response actions following a recent southern Gaza incident, in which two soldiers were fatally wounded. While Gaza’s officials reported 44 deaths, Israeli news pundits complained about the “moderate answer,” which targeted just infrastructure.

That is not new. Over the previous weekend, Gaza’s media office charged Israeli forces of violating the peace with the group 47 occasions since the agreement began, killing dozens of individuals and harming an additional 143. The assertion was unimportant to the majority of Israeli media outlets – it was just ignored. That included information that 11 individuals of a Palestinian household were lost their lives by Israeli soldiers recently.

The civil defence agency said the group had been trying to return to their dwelling in the a Gaza City neighbourhood of the city when the vehicle they were in was fired upon for reportedly going over the “boundary” that defines zones under Israeli military command. That limit is invisible to the naked eye and appears only on charts and in official papers – sometimes not accessible to average residents in the area.

Even this incident scarcely got a mention in Israeli news outlets. One source referred to it shortly on its digital site, referencing an IDF representative who stated that after a questionable transport was identified, forces fired cautionary rounds towards it, “but the vehicle kept to move toward the forces in a fashion that created an immediate danger to them. The forces engaged to remove the danger, in accordance with the truce.” Zero fatalities were claimed.

With this perspective, it is no surprise a lot of Israeli citizens feel the group alone is to responsible for breaking the ceasefire. That perception could lead to prompting calls for a tougher stance in the region.

Sooner or later – possibly in the near future – it will no longer be adequate for American representatives to act as kindergarten teachers, instructing the Israeli government what not to do. They will {have to|need