🔗 Share this article

Thhese days exhibit a quite unique phenomenon: the first-ever US parade of the caretakers. Their attributes range in their qualifications and traits, but they all have the identical goal – to prevent an Israeli infringement, or even destruction, of the fragile peace agreement. Since the war concluded, there have been rare days without at least one of Donald Trump’s delegates on the territory. Only this past week featured the likes of a senior advisor, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all appearing to execute their duties.

Israel keeps them busy. In just a few short period it executed a wave of operations in the region after the loss of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers – leading, according to reports, in scores of Palestinian fatalities. Multiple ministers called for a restart of the war, and the Knesset approved a preliminary resolution to incorporate the West Bank. The US stance was somewhere ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in various respects, the American government appears more concentrated on upholding the existing, tense phase of the ceasefire than on advancing to the subsequent: the rebuilding of Gaza. Concerning that, it seems the US may have goals but no concrete proposals.

At present, it remains uncertain when the proposed international administrative entity will truly assume control, and the same is true for the designated peacekeeping troops – or even the makeup of its members. On Tuesday, Vance said the US would not dictate the composition of the international force on the Israeli government. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet persists to dismiss multiple options – as it did with the Turkish proposal lately – what occurs next? There is also the opposite point: which party will establish whether the forces favoured by Israel are even prepared in the task?

The matter of the timeframe it will need to neutralize the militant group is similarly unclear. “The expectation in the leadership is that the global peacekeeping unit is will at this point take the lead in disarming the organization,” remarked the official lately. “That’s will require a while.” The former president further emphasized the uncertainty, stating in an conversation a few days ago that there is no “rigid” schedule for Hamas to demilitarize. So, hypothetically, the unnamed participants of this not yet established international force could enter Gaza while Hamas fighters still wield influence. Would they be confronting a leadership or a guerrilla movement? These represent only some of the concerns arising. Some might question what the outcome will be for everyday civilians under current conditions, with Hamas carrying on to target its own political rivals and critics.

Current incidents have once again emphasized the gaps of Israeli reporting on the two sides of the Gaza frontier. Every source attempts to examine every possible perspective of the group's violations of the peace. And, in general, the situation that Hamas has been stalling the return of the bodies of deceased Israeli captives has taken over the headlines.

Conversely, reporting of civilian casualties in the region resulting from Israeli attacks has garnered minimal notice – if at all. Consider the Israeli response attacks after a recent southern Gaza incident, in which a pair of troops were killed. While Gaza’s authorities claimed 44 deaths, Israeli television analysts questioned the “limited reaction,” which hit just installations.

That is nothing new. During the past weekend, the media office accused Israeli forces of infringing the truce with Hamas multiple occasions since the ceasefire came into effect, resulting in the loss of 38 Palestinians and injuring another many more. The claim was unimportant to most Israeli news programmes – it was merely ignored. Even reports that 11 members of a Palestinian household were killed by Israeli forces recently.

The civil defence agency reported the family had been seeking to return to their dwelling in the Zeitoun neighbourhood of Gaza City when the vehicle they were in was targeted for allegedly passing the “demarcation line” that marks areas under Israeli army authority. This boundary is invisible to the human eye and shows up just on charts and in government papers – often not obtainable to average people in the region.

Even that occurrence scarcely got a note in Israeli media. One source covered it shortly on its digital site, citing an IDF official who explained that after a questionable car was spotted, troops fired warning shots towards it, “but the vehicle kept to move toward the soldiers in a fashion that posed an direct threat to them. The forces shot to remove the threat, in line with the ceasefire.” No casualties were stated.

With this framing, it is little wonder many Israeli citizens feel Hamas solely is to responsible for infringing the truce. That belief could lead to encouraging demands for a more aggressive strategy in the region.

Sooner or later – possibly sooner than expected – it will not be adequate for all the president’s men to play supervisors, advising Israel what to refrain from. They will {have to|need