🔗 Share this article

These times exhibit a quite unusual situation: the pioneering US march of the babysitters. Their qualifications differ in their qualifications and characteristics, but they all share the common goal – to prevent an Israeli breach, or even destruction, of Gaza’s fragile truce. After the conflict concluded, there have been scant days without at least one of the former president's representatives on the scene. Just this past week saw the likes of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all coming to perform their duties.

The Israeli government occupies their time. In just a few short period it launched a set of operations in the region after the deaths of a pair of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) personnel – leading, based on accounts, in dozens of local casualties. Several ministers urged a restart of the conflict, and the Israeli parliament enacted a preliminary resolution to incorporate the West Bank. The American reaction was somehow between “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in several ways, the Trump administration appears more intent on maintaining the current, unstable stage of the peace than on moving to the subsequent: the rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip. Regarding this, it seems the United States may have aspirations but few specific plans.

At present, it is unknown at what point the suggested multinational administrative entity will actually begin operating, and the same goes for the appointed security force – or even the identity of its personnel. On a recent day, Vance said the United States would not dictate the composition of the foreign contingent on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet persists to reject multiple options – as it acted with the Ankara's suggestion recently – what happens then? There is also the opposite question: which party will decide whether the troops supported by the Israelis are even prepared in the mission?

The question of how long it will need to neutralize the militant group is equally unclear. “The aim in the government is that the global peacekeeping unit is will at this point take the lead in neutralizing Hamas,” remarked Vance lately. “That’s will require a while.” The former president further reinforced the uncertainty, declaring in an conversation on Sunday that there is no “fixed” deadline for the group to disarm. So, theoretically, the unknown elements of this yet-to-be-formed global force could arrive in Gaza while Hamas militants continue to remain in control. Are they confronting a governing body or a militant faction? These represent only some of the concerns surfacing. Others might question what the verdict will be for ordinary civilians under current conditions, with Hamas persisting to focus on its own opponents and dissidents.

Latest events have yet again emphasized the gaps of Israeli journalism on each side of the Gaza frontier. Each publication strives to analyze every possible angle of Hamas’s infractions of the ceasefire. And, usually, the situation that Hamas has been stalling the repatriation of the bodies of deceased Israeli captives has taken over the news.

On the other hand, attention of civilian deaths in the region stemming from Israeli attacks has obtained minimal attention – if at all. Take the Israeli response strikes following Sunday’s southern Gaza event, in which two troops were fatally wounded. While Gaza’s sources claimed 44 deaths, Israeli media analysts questioned the “moderate response,” which hit just facilities.

That is nothing new. During the recent weekend, the information bureau charged Israel of breaking the truce with the group multiple occasions after the truce came into effect, resulting in the loss of dozens of Palestinians and injuring another 143. The assertion seemed insignificant to most Israeli reporting – it was simply ignored. This applied to reports that 11 members of a local household were lost their lives by Israeli forces a few days ago.

The rescue organization stated the family had been seeking to return to their residence in the Zeitoun neighbourhood of the city when the bus they were in was attacked for allegedly going over the “boundary” that demarcates zones under Israeli military command. That limit is invisible to the ordinary view and is visible solely on maps and in government papers – sometimes not accessible to ordinary residents in the area.

Yet that occurrence barely received a mention in Israeli journalism. Channel 13 News covered it briefly on its online platform, quoting an IDF official who stated that after a questionable car was identified, forces discharged cautionary rounds towards it, “but the car persisted to move toward the soldiers in a fashion that posed an direct threat to them. The troops shot to remove the danger, in accordance with the ceasefire.” Zero injuries were claimed.

Given such framing, it is understandable many Israelis believe the group exclusively is to blame for breaking the ceasefire. That belief threatens prompting calls for a tougher approach in Gaza.

Eventually – perhaps sooner rather than later – it will no longer be enough for US envoys to play supervisors, telling the Israeli government what not to do. They will {have to|need