🔗 Share this article

Thhese times showcase a quite unusual occurrence: the pioneering US procession of the babysitters. Their qualifications differ in their expertise and traits, but they all possess the identical objective – to avert an Israeli breach, or even destruction, of the fragile truce. After the hostilities ended, there have been rare days without at least one of Donald Trump’s delegates on the scene. Just this past week included the arrival of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, a senator and a political figure – all coming to perform their roles.

Israel keeps them busy. In just a few days it launched a set of strikes in Gaza after the deaths of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops – leading, based on accounts, in many of local injuries. Several leaders called for a renewal of the fighting, and the Knesset approved a preliminary decision to annex the occupied territories. The US response was somehow between “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in more than one sense, the US leadership seems more concentrated on preserving the current, tense period of the ceasefire than on progressing to the following: the rehabilitation of Gaza. Regarding this, it appears the US may have aspirations but few concrete strategies.

Currently, it is unknown when the planned international oversight committee will actually begin operating, and the identical applies to the designated peacekeeping troops – or even the makeup of its soldiers. On a recent day, Vance declared the United States would not force the membership of the international unit on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet persists to refuse one alternative after another – as it acted with the Turkish suggestion recently – what occurs next? There is also the reverse question: which party will decide whether the units favoured by the Israelis are even prepared in the mission?

The matter of the timeframe it will require to demilitarize Hamas is equally unclear. “The expectation in the government is that the international security force is going to now take charge in neutralizing the organization,” remarked the official recently. “It’s will require some time.” Trump only emphasized the lack of clarity, saying in an discussion recently that there is no “hard” schedule for Hamas to demilitarize. So, theoretically, the unknown participants of this still unformed international contingent could arrive in Gaza while Hamas militants continue to hold power. Would they be facing a leadership or a militant faction? These are just a few of the concerns surfacing. Some might question what the outcome will be for average residents in the present situation, with the group persisting to focus on its own adversaries and dissidents.

Current developments have yet again emphasized the blind spots of Israeli media coverage on each side of the Gazan boundary. Every outlet strives to examine all conceivable aspect of the group's breaches of the ceasefire. And, in general, the situation that Hamas has been delaying the repatriation of the bodies of slain Israeli hostages has monopolized the news.

On the other hand, reporting of civilian fatalities in Gaza stemming from Israeli attacks has garnered scant focus – or none. Consider the Israeli response actions following Sunday’s southern Gaza occurrence, in which a pair of soldiers were killed. While Gaza’s officials claimed dozens of casualties, Israeli television commentators criticised the “light answer,” which focused on just infrastructure.

That is typical. Over the past weekend, the media office alleged Israeli forces of infringing the peace with Hamas 47 occasions since the truce came into effect, killing 38 individuals and harming another many more. The claim seemed irrelevant to the majority of Israeli news programmes – it was simply absent. That included reports that 11 individuals of a local family were fatally shot by Israeli soldiers last Friday.

Gaza’s civil defence agency said the individuals had been attempting to go back to their residence in the Zeitoun neighbourhood of Gaza City when the transport they were in was fired upon for supposedly passing the “demarcation line” that demarcates zones under Israeli military authority. That boundary is invisible to the ordinary view and appears just on charts and in authoritative papers – sometimes not obtainable to average individuals in the territory.

Yet this event hardly rated a mention in Israeli news outlets. One source mentioned it shortly on its online platform, referencing an Israeli military spokesperson who said that after a suspect vehicle was identified, troops shot alerting fire towards it, “but the car continued to advance on the forces in a fashion that created an immediate risk to them. The soldiers opened fire to eliminate the risk, in line with the agreement.” Zero casualties were claimed.

Given this narrative, it is no surprise many Israelis believe the group exclusively is to responsible for breaking the ceasefire. This view risks encouraging appeals for a stronger approach in Gaza.

At some point – perhaps in the near future – it will not be enough for American representatives to take on the role of caretakers, telling Israel what not to do. They will {have to|need