🔗 Share this article

Thhese times exhibit a very distinctive occurrence: the first-ever US parade of the babysitters. Their attributes range in their qualifications and characteristics, but they all have the common mission – to prevent an Israeli infringement, or even destruction, of Gaza’s delicate ceasefire. After the conflict concluded, there have been rare occasions without at least one of Donald Trump’s delegates on the territory. Just in the last few days included the presence of a senior advisor, a businessman, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all coming to perform their duties.

Israel occupies their time. In only a few days it launched a set of attacks in Gaza after the killings of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers – leading, according to reports, in scores of Palestinian casualties. Multiple leaders urged a renewal of the fighting, and the Knesset approved a early resolution to annex the occupied territories. The US reaction was somewhere ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

But in several ways, the American government appears more concentrated on upholding the existing, uneasy phase of the truce than on progressing to the following: the rebuilding of the Gaza Strip. Regarding this, it appears the US may have goals but little specific strategies.

For now, it remains unknown at what point the planned global oversight committee will actually take power, and the similar goes for the appointed peacekeeping troops – or even the identity of its personnel. On a recent day, Vance said the US would not dictate the composition of the international force on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet persists to refuse one alternative after another – as it did with the Ankara's offer lately – what occurs next? There is also the contrary issue: which party will determine whether the forces favoured by Israel are even interested in the mission?

The matter of the timeframe it will need to disarm Hamas is equally unclear. “The aim in the government is that the international security force is will at this point take the lead in disarming the organization,” said the official recently. “That’s going to take a while.” The former president only highlighted the lack of clarity, declaring in an conversation a few days ago that there is no “hard” timeline for Hamas to demilitarize. So, in theory, the unnamed elements of this yet-to-be-formed global force could arrive in Gaza while Hamas fighters still wield influence. Are they dealing with a governing body or a insurgent group? These are just a few of the concerns emerging. Others might wonder what the outcome will be for everyday residents under current conditions, with the group persisting to focus on its own political rivals and dissidents.

Latest events have once again emphasized the omissions of local journalism on each side of the Gaza boundary. Each source seeks to examine every possible aspect of Hamas’s violations of the ceasefire. And, usually, the fact that the organization has been hindering the return of the bodies of slain Israeli captives has taken over the news.

By contrast, reporting of non-combatant casualties in the region caused by Israeli strikes has obtained little focus – or none. Consider the Israeli retaliatory strikes following a recent southern Gaza incident, in which two soldiers were killed. While local officials stated dozens of deaths, Israeli news commentators complained about the “light answer,” which hit only installations.

That is typical. During the recent few days, Gaza’s media office charged Israel of infringing the truce with the group 47 times since the ceasefire began, killing dozens of individuals and harming another many more. The claim seemed unimportant to the majority of Israeli reporting – it was merely missing. Even information that 11 members of a local household were killed by Israeli soldiers last Friday.

The rescue organization reported the family had been attempting to go back to their residence in the Zeitoun neighbourhood of Gaza City when the transport they were in was attacked for supposedly crossing the “boundary” that defines territories under Israeli military control. This limit is invisible to the ordinary view and appears solely on maps and in authoritative records – often not obtainable to ordinary people in the territory.

Even that event scarcely received a reference in Israeli journalism. Channel 13 News referred to it shortly on its online platform, citing an IDF spokesperson who explained that after a suspicious transport was detected, soldiers shot alerting fire towards it, “but the transport persisted to move toward the troops in a fashion that posed an direct threat to them. The troops engaged to remove the threat, in line with the ceasefire.” No casualties were claimed.

With this perspective, it is little wonder numerous Israelis think the group alone is to at fault for infringing the truce. This perception threatens fuelling calls for a stronger stance in Gaza.

Sooner or later – possibly sooner than expected – it will no longer be enough for all the president’s men to take on the role of caretakers, instructing the Israeli government what not to do. They will {have to|need