🔗 Share this article

Thhese times showcase a very unusual situation: the pioneering US parade of the babysitters. They vary in their qualifications and traits, but they all have the identical goal – to stop an Israeli infringement, or even destruction, of Gaza’s unstable truce. Since the war finished, there have been rare occasions without at least one of Donald Trump’s delegates on the ground. Only recently included the presence of a senior advisor, a businessman, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all arriving to perform their assignments.

The Israeli government occupies their time. In only a few short period it launched a wave of operations in the region after the killings of a pair of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops – leading, as reported, in many of local injuries. Several leaders called for a restart of the conflict, and the Knesset approved a initial decision to annex the West Bank. The American reaction was somehow ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

But in several ways, the Trump administration appears more concentrated on preserving the existing, tense phase of the truce than on moving to the next: the rehabilitation of Gaza. Concerning this, it looks the United States may have goals but little tangible strategies.

Currently, it remains unclear at what point the proposed international administrative entity will actually assume control, and the identical goes for the designated security force – or even the identity of its members. On Tuesday, Vance declared the US would not dictate the membership of the foreign unit on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s government persists to dismiss multiple options – as it acted with the Ankara's suggestion this week – what follows? There is also the opposite question: who will establish whether the units favoured by the Israelis are even interested in the mission?

The matter of the duration it will require to disarm Hamas is similarly unclear. “Our hope in the administration is that the global peacekeeping unit is intends to at this point assume responsibility in demilitarizing the organization,” said the official recently. “That’s may need a period.” Trump further highlighted the lack of clarity, stating in an conversation on Sunday that there is no “rigid” timeline for Hamas to disarm. So, hypothetically, the unknown participants of this yet-to-be-formed international force could enter Gaza while the organization's militants still wield influence. Would they be facing a leadership or a guerrilla movement? These represent only some of the questions emerging. Some might wonder what the result will be for ordinary civilians under current conditions, with Hamas continuing to attack its own political rivals and opposition.

Latest developments have yet again highlighted the omissions of Israeli journalism on both sides of the Gazan boundary. Every outlet seeks to scrutinize each potential angle of the group's breaches of the ceasefire. And, in general, the reality that Hamas has been hindering the return of the remains of slain Israeli captives has monopolized the news.

By contrast, reporting of civilian casualties in Gaza resulting from Israeli attacks has received scant attention – if any. Take the Israeli response attacks after Sunday’s southern Gaza incident, in which a pair of military personnel were killed. While local authorities claimed dozens of casualties, Israeli television commentators complained about the “light response,” which hit just infrastructure.

This is not new. Over the past few days, Gaza’s media office charged Israel of violating the peace with Hamas multiple times since the truce came into effect, causing the death of 38 individuals and wounding an additional many more. The claim seemed irrelevant to most Israeli news programmes – it was simply missing. Even accounts that 11 individuals of a Palestinian household were fatally shot by Israeli troops last Friday.

The rescue organization stated the family had been attempting to return to their home in the a Gaza City district of Gaza City when the transport they were in was targeted for allegedly crossing the “yellow line” that marks areas under Israeli military command. This yellow line is not visible to the ordinary view and appears solely on plans and in authoritative papers – not always available to average residents in the territory.

Even this event barely rated a reference in Israeli journalism. A major outlet mentioned it shortly on its online platform, citing an IDF official who said that after a suspect vehicle was identified, soldiers fired warning shots towards it, “but the transport kept to move toward the soldiers in a fashion that caused an direct danger to them. The soldiers shot to remove the danger, in line with the agreement.” No fatalities were stated.

With such narrative, it is no surprise a lot of Israelis think Hamas solely is to at fault for breaking the peace. That view could lead to encouraging calls for a tougher approach in Gaza.

Eventually – possibly in the near future – it will not be adequate for US envoys to play supervisors, telling the Israeli government what to avoid. They will {have to|need