🔗 Share this article

These days present a quite unusual phenomenon: the pioneering US parade of the caretakers. They vary in their expertise and attributes, but they all share the common objective – to stop an Israeli infringement, or even demolition, of Gaza’s fragile ceasefire. After the conflict concluded, there have been scant occasions without at least one of the former president's representatives on the territory. Only in the last few days included the likes of Jared Kushner, a businessman, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all coming to carry out their assignments.

The Israeli government engages them fully. In only a few short period it launched a wave of strikes in the region after the deaths of two Israeli military personnel – leading, based on accounts, in many of Palestinian casualties. Several leaders urged a renewal of the fighting, and the Knesset enacted a preliminary decision to incorporate the West Bank. The US stance was somewhere between “no” and “hell no.”

However in several ways, the Trump administration appears more concentrated on maintaining the present, tense stage of the ceasefire than on progressing to the next: the rehabilitation of Gaza. When it comes to this, it appears the United States may have ambitions but no concrete proposals.

Currently, it remains unknown at what point the proposed global administrative entity will truly begin operating, and the same applies to the designated security force – or even the identity of its soldiers. On a recent day, a US official stated the US would not dictate the composition of the international force on the Israeli government. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s government keeps to reject multiple options – as it did with the Ankara's suggestion this week – what happens then? There is also the opposite point: which party will establish whether the forces preferred by Israel are even interested in the task?

The matter of how long it will take to neutralize the militant group is similarly ambiguous. “Our hope in the leadership is that the global peacekeeping unit is intends to now take the lead in demilitarizing the organization,” remarked Vance lately. “That’s may need some time.” Trump further highlighted the uncertainty, stating in an discussion on Sunday that there is no “rigid” deadline for the group to disarm. So, theoretically, the unnamed elements of this not yet established global contingent could enter the territory while Hamas members continue to remain in control. Are they facing a administration or a guerrilla movement? Among the many of the questions emerging. Some might question what the result will be for everyday civilians under current conditions, with Hamas persisting to target its own adversaries and critics.

Latest incidents have once again emphasized the blind spots of Israeli journalism on the two sides of the Gaza border. Each source seeks to scrutinize all conceivable aspect of Hamas’s violations of the truce. And, in general, the situation that the organization has been delaying the return of the bodies of slain Israeli captives has dominated the headlines.

By contrast, reporting of non-combatant fatalities in Gaza resulting from Israeli attacks has received little notice – if at all. Consider the Israeli retaliatory strikes following Sunday’s southern Gaza event, in which two military personnel were lost. While Gaza’s authorities stated dozens of deaths, Israeli news analysts complained about the “light answer,” which focused on only infrastructure.

That is nothing new. Over the past few days, Gaza’s press agency charged Israeli forces of violating the truce with Hamas 47 times after the ceasefire was implemented, killing dozens of Palestinians and harming an additional many more. The allegation seemed insignificant to most Israeli reporting – it was just absent. Even reports that eleven individuals of a Palestinian household were killed by Israeli troops a few days ago.

Gaza’s civil defence agency reported the group had been trying to go back to their dwelling in the a Gaza City neighbourhood of the city when the transport they were in was attacked for supposedly crossing the “demarcation line” that defines territories under Israeli army authority. This yellow line is unseen to the naked eye and appears just on plans and in government records – sometimes not obtainable to ordinary people in the territory.

Yet this occurrence barely got a mention in Israeli journalism. Channel 13 News mentioned it briefly on its online platform, quoting an IDF official who said that after a suspect car was detected, soldiers fired warning shots towards it, “but the vehicle persisted to advance on the troops in a way that caused an immediate threat to them. The soldiers engaged to remove the danger, in compliance with the ceasefire.” No casualties were stated.

Amid this narrative, it is no surprise numerous Israelis feel Hamas exclusively is to responsible for breaking the peace. That belief could lead to fuelling appeals for a tougher strategy in the region.

Sooner or later – perhaps in the near future – it will no longer be adequate for American representatives to take on the role of supervisors, instructing Israel what to refrain from. They will {have to|need