🔗 Share this article

These times exhibit a quite distinctive phenomenon: the inaugural US parade of the babysitters. Their attributes range in their skills and traits, but they all share the common mission – to avert an Israeli breach, or even destruction, of the unstable ceasefire. After the hostilities ended, there have been few days without at least one of Donald Trump’s envoys on the ground. Just this past week included the presence of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, a senator and a political figure – all coming to execute their duties.

The Israeli government occupies their time. In only a few days it launched a wave of attacks in the region after the killings of a pair of Israeli military troops – leading, according to reports, in dozens of Palestinian injuries. Multiple officials urged a renewal of the war, and the Knesset passed a preliminary resolution to incorporate the occupied territories. The US stance was somehow ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

However in several ways, the US leadership appears more intent on maintaining the present, unstable period of the ceasefire than on moving to the subsequent: the reconstruction of Gaza. Regarding that, it appears the United States may have goals but little specific strategies.

At present, it is unclear when the suggested global administrative entity will truly begin operating, and the similar goes for the proposed security force – or even the identity of its personnel. On a recent day, Vance said the US would not force the composition of the foreign force on Israel. But if the prime minister's administration continues to dismiss multiple options – as it acted with the Ankara's proposal recently – what follows? There is also the opposite issue: which party will decide whether the units supported by Israel are even prepared in the assignment?

The issue of the duration it will require to disarm the militant group is just as vague. “The expectation in the leadership is that the global peacekeeping unit is intends to now assume responsibility in neutralizing the organization,” remarked Vance this week. “It’s will require a while.” The former president further emphasized the lack of clarity, declaring in an discussion on Sunday that there is no “hard” schedule for Hamas to demilitarize. So, hypothetically, the unidentified participants of this not yet established international force could enter the territory while Hamas militants continue to remain in control. Would they be dealing with a governing body or a insurgent group? These represent only some of the concerns emerging. Some might ask what the verdict will be for everyday civilians under current conditions, with the group carrying on to target its own opponents and opposition.

Latest events have yet again underscored the omissions of Israeli journalism on both sides of the Gazan boundary. Every source seeks to analyze every possible aspect of the group's violations of the ceasefire. And, typically, the situation that the organization has been stalling the return of the bodies of killed Israeli hostages has dominated the news.

On the other hand, reporting of non-combatant casualties in Gaza resulting from Israeli operations has obtained minimal notice – if at all. Consider the Israeli retaliatory attacks after Sunday’s Rafah event, in which two troops were killed. While Gaza’s officials claimed dozens of casualties, Israeli television pundits questioned the “moderate response,” which hit only facilities.

This is typical. Over the past weekend, Gaza’s press agency accused Israel of infringing the truce with Hamas multiple occasions since the agreement began, causing the death of dozens of individuals and wounding another many more. The claim was unimportant to the majority of Israeli media outlets – it was just absent. That included reports that 11 members of a Palestinian family were lost their lives by Israeli troops last Friday.

Gaza’s civil defence agency reported the group had been attempting to go back to their dwelling in the Zeitoun neighbourhood of the city when the vehicle they were in was fired upon for allegedly passing the “boundary” that marks areas under Israeli military control. That limit is not visible to the ordinary view and shows up solely on plans and in official records – sometimes not available to average people in the region.

Yet this incident barely rated a reference in Israeli journalism. A major outlet mentioned it briefly on its digital site, quoting an IDF official who stated that after a suspicious vehicle was spotted, forces discharged alerting fire towards it, “but the car persisted to approach the soldiers in a fashion that created an imminent risk to them. The troops engaged to eliminate the danger, in compliance with the ceasefire.” Zero fatalities were stated.

With such narrative, it is little wonder numerous Israelis think Hamas exclusively is to responsible for violating the peace. That perception risks fuelling demands for a tougher approach in the region.

Eventually – maybe in the near future – it will no longer be sufficient for US envoys to play supervisors, advising Israel what to avoid. They will {have to|need