🔗 Share this article

Thhese days exhibit a very unusual phenomenon: the first-ever US procession of the babysitters. Their qualifications differ in their qualifications and characteristics, but they all possess the identical goal – to prevent an Israeli violation, or even destruction, of the fragile peace agreement. Since the war concluded, there have been scant occasions without at least one of Donald Trump’s envoys on the scene. Just recently included the likes of a senior advisor, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and a political figure – all arriving to perform their roles.

Israel keeps them busy. In just a few days it launched a wave of attacks in Gaza after the deaths of a pair of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops – resulting, according to reports, in scores of local casualties. Several ministers called for a resumption of the conflict, and the Knesset approved a early resolution to take over the West Bank. The US stance was somehow ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in more than one sense, the Trump administration seems more concentrated on maintaining the existing, tense stage of the ceasefire than on advancing to the next: the rehabilitation of Gaza. Concerning this, it looks the United States may have aspirations but few specific proposals.

For now, it is unknown when the proposed global oversight committee will actually begin operating, and the identical goes for the designated peacekeeping troops – or even the composition of its soldiers. On a recent day, a US official stated the United States would not impose the membership of the international unit on the Israeli government. But if the prime minister's cabinet persists to reject one alternative after another – as it did with the Ankara's suggestion lately – what happens then? There is also the contrary issue: who will decide whether the troops supported by Israel are even interested in the mission?

The question of the duration it will take to disarm the militant group is equally vague. “Our hope in the leadership is that the multinational troops is intends to now take the lead in neutralizing the organization,” remarked the official lately. “That’s will require a period.” Trump further emphasized the ambiguity, declaring in an conversation a few days ago that there is no “rigid” schedule for the group to lay down arms. So, in theory, the unnamed participants of this still unformed international force could deploy to Gaza while the organization's members still wield influence. Would they be confronting a leadership or a guerrilla movement? These represent only some of the questions emerging. Others might question what the result will be for average Palestinians under current conditions, with Hamas continuing to focus on its own opponents and opposition.

Current developments have yet again underscored the blind spots of local reporting on the two sides of the Gazan boundary. Every source strives to analyze every possible aspect of Hamas’s infractions of the peace. And, usually, the fact that Hamas has been hindering the repatriation of the remains of slain Israeli hostages has monopolized the coverage.

By contrast, reporting of civilian deaths in the region stemming from Israeli operations has received little notice – or none. Take the Israeli retaliatory actions in the wake of Sunday’s southern Gaza incident, in which a pair of soldiers were killed. While Gaza’s authorities reported 44 casualties, Israeli news analysts criticised the “moderate response,” which targeted just facilities.

This is not new. Over the past few days, the media office charged Israeli forces of infringing the ceasefire with the group multiple times since the agreement came into effect, resulting in the loss of dozens of individuals and harming an additional 143. The assertion seemed unimportant to most Israeli reporting – it was just absent. That included reports that eleven members of a local family were killed by Israeli forces last Friday.

Gaza’s rescue organization said the family had been seeking to go back to their dwelling in the a Gaza City area of Gaza City when the transport they were in was attacked for supposedly passing the “demarcation line” that demarcates zones under Israeli military command. This yellow line is not visible to the human eye and appears solely on maps and in government papers – sometimes not available to everyday residents in the area.

Even this event barely rated a mention in Israeli media. A major outlet covered it briefly on its website, quoting an IDF representative who explained that after a suspicious transport was spotted, soldiers shot warning shots towards it, “but the vehicle kept to approach the forces in a manner that caused an imminent danger to them. The troops shot to remove the threat, in accordance with the truce.” Zero fatalities were stated.

With such perspective, it is little wonder numerous Israeli citizens believe Hamas alone is to at fault for breaking the truce. This view could lead to fuelling calls for a stronger stance in the region.

Sooner or later – perhaps sooner than expected – it will not be sufficient for American representatives to take on the role of supervisors, instructing Israel what to avoid. They will {have to|need