🔗 Share this article

Thhese days present a quite distinctive situation: the pioneering US march of the caretakers. Their attributes range in their expertise and traits, but they all have the common objective – to avert an Israeli breach, or even devastation, of the fragile ceasefire. Since the hostilities concluded, there have been rare days without at least one of Donald Trump’s representatives on the ground. Only this past week saw the presence of a senior advisor, a businessman, JD Vance and a political figure – all arriving to execute their roles.

The Israeli government engages them fully. In only a few days it launched a series of strikes in Gaza after the loss of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops – leading, based on accounts, in scores of Palestinian injuries. Several leaders urged a restart of the conflict, and the Knesset enacted a initial decision to annex the West Bank. The American stance was somewhere ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

But in various respects, the US leadership seems more intent on upholding the current, tense stage of the truce than on progressing to the subsequent: the rebuilding of Gaza. When it comes to that, it seems the United States may have aspirations but few concrete strategies.

At present, it remains unclear at what point the proposed global governing body will effectively assume control, and the identical goes for the designated peacekeeping troops – or even the makeup of its members. On a recent day, Vance stated the United States would not force the membership of the foreign unit on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet keeps to reject multiple options – as it did with the Ankara's offer recently – what occurs next? There is also the contrary question: which party will decide whether the forces preferred by Israel are even prepared in the assignment?

The matter of the duration it will require to disarm the militant group is similarly vague. “The aim in the leadership is that the international security force is going to at this point assume responsibility in disarming Hamas,” stated Vance lately. “It’s will require some time.” Trump further highlighted the ambiguity, stating in an interview recently that there is no “fixed” timeline for Hamas to lay down arms. So, in theory, the unknown elements of this still unformed international force could arrive in Gaza while Hamas fighters still remain in control. Are they confronting a leadership or a insurgent group? These represent only some of the concerns emerging. Others might wonder what the result will be for ordinary Palestinians under current conditions, with Hamas persisting to attack its own adversaries and dissidents.

Current events have yet again underscored the omissions of Israeli reporting on both sides of the Gaza boundary. Each publication strives to examine each potential angle of the group's breaches of the ceasefire. And, usually, the fact that Hamas has been hindering the repatriation of the bodies of deceased Israeli captives has taken over the coverage.

By contrast, attention of civilian casualties in Gaza caused by Israeli strikes has garnered scant focus – if any. Take the Israeli counter attacks in the wake of Sunday’s Rafah incident, in which a pair of soldiers were lost. While local sources reported dozens of fatalities, Israeli news pundits criticised the “limited response,” which hit only facilities.

This is typical. Over the past weekend, the press agency charged Israel of breaking the peace with Hamas 47 times after the truce began, killing 38 individuals and wounding another 143. The claim was insignificant to the majority of Israeli reporting – it was merely absent. This applied to accounts that eleven individuals of a local household were fatally shot by Israeli soldiers recently.

Gaza’s emergency services said the individuals had been trying to return to their home in the Zeitoun district of Gaza City when the bus they were in was targeted for allegedly passing the “demarcation line” that defines zones under Israeli army control. That limit is invisible to the ordinary view and shows up just on charts and in official documents – often not available to ordinary individuals in the area.

Even this occurrence scarcely got a mention in Israeli media. One source referred to it briefly on its digital site, citing an Israeli military spokesperson who said that after a questionable transport was detected, forces shot alerting fire towards it, “but the transport kept to move toward the troops in a way that posed an immediate risk to them. The soldiers shot to neutralize the risk, in compliance with the ceasefire.” Zero injuries were stated.

Given this framing, it is little wonder many Israeli citizens feel Hamas solely is to at fault for breaking the ceasefire. This view risks prompting calls for a tougher approach in the region.

At some point – perhaps sooner rather than later – it will no longer be enough for American representatives to take on the role of supervisors, advising the Israeli government what not to do. They will {have to|need