🔗 Share this article

These times present a very unusual situation: the inaugural US parade of the caretakers. They vary in their skills and traits, but they all possess the common goal – to stop an Israeli breach, or even destruction, of Gaza’s delicate truce. Since the war finished, there have been few days without at least one of Donald Trump’s representatives on the territory. Just recently included the arrival of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, a senator and a political figure – all arriving to perform their duties.

The Israeli government keeps them busy. In only a few short period it executed a set of operations in the region after the loss of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) personnel – leading, according to reports, in many of local casualties. A number of leaders urged a restart of the conflict, and the Knesset approved a early decision to incorporate the occupied territories. The American reaction was somewhere ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in more than one sense, the US leadership appears more focused on maintaining the existing, tense stage of the ceasefire than on progressing to the subsequent: the rebuilding of the Gaza Strip. When it comes to this, it looks the United States may have goals but little specific plans.

For now, it remains uncertain when the proposed global governing body will effectively begin operating, and the similar is true for the designated military contingent – or even the composition of its personnel. On Tuesday, Vance declared the United States would not force the composition of the international force on the Israeli government. But if the prime minister's government keeps to refuse various proposals – as it did with the Turkish proposal lately – what follows? There is also the opposite question: which party will decide whether the troops favoured by the Israelis are even prepared in the assignment?

The issue of how long it will take to neutralize Hamas is similarly unclear. “The expectation in the government is that the international security force is going to at this point take the lead in demilitarizing the organization,” said the official lately. “It’s going to take a while.” The former president only reinforced the lack of clarity, saying in an interview on Sunday that there is no “fixed” deadline for the group to lay down arms. So, in theory, the unidentified members of this not yet established global force could deploy to the territory while Hamas members still hold power. Would they be dealing with a administration or a insurgent group? These represent only some of the issues emerging. Some might wonder what the result will be for ordinary civilians as things stand, with Hamas persisting to attack its own opponents and dissidents.

Latest events have yet again underscored the gaps of local reporting on each side of the Gazan boundary. Each source seeks to analyze every possible perspective of Hamas’s violations of the peace. And, in general, the reality that the organization has been hindering the return of the remains of killed Israeli captives has dominated the coverage.

Conversely, attention of non-combatant casualties in the region caused by Israeli strikes has obtained little attention – or none. Consider the Israeli counter actions after a recent Rafah incident, in which a pair of troops were killed. While local sources claimed dozens of casualties, Israeli media analysts questioned the “light response,” which targeted only infrastructure.

This is not new. During the recent weekend, Gaza’s information bureau charged Israel of violating the peace with the group multiple occasions since the ceasefire came into effect, causing the death of 38 Palestinians and harming an additional many more. The claim seemed irrelevant to the majority of Israeli media outlets – it was just ignored. Even information that 11 individuals of a local household were lost their lives by Israeli soldiers recently.

Gaza’s civil defence agency stated the individuals had been trying to go back to their dwelling in the Zeitoun district of the city when the transport they were in was attacked for supposedly passing the “demarcation line” that demarcates territories under Israeli military control. That boundary is unseen to the ordinary view and appears solely on plans and in authoritative documents – often not accessible to everyday residents in the area.

Yet that incident scarcely got a note in Israeli news outlets. One source referred to it shortly on its digital site, referencing an IDF representative who said that after a suspect transport was identified, soldiers discharged warning shots towards it, “but the transport kept to approach the troops in a fashion that created an immediate danger to them. The troops opened fire to neutralize the danger, in compliance with the truce.” Zero injuries were stated.

With such narrative, it is no surprise many Israelis think Hamas alone is to blame for breaking the peace. That belief risks fuelling demands for a tougher stance in Gaza.

At some point – perhaps in the near future – it will no longer be adequate for American representatives to play kindergarten teachers, advising the Israeli government what to refrain from. They will {have to|need