🔗 Share this article

Thhese days showcase a quite unique phenomenon: the first-ever US procession of the babysitters. Their qualifications differ in their expertise and attributes, but they all share the common mission – to prevent an Israeli violation, or even devastation, of the fragile peace agreement. Since the conflict ended, there have been few occasions without at least one of the former president's representatives on the scene. Just this past week saw the likes of a senior advisor, a businessman, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all coming to execute their assignments.

The Israeli government occupies their time. In only a few short period it executed a wave of attacks in the region after the loss of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers – resulting, as reported, in scores of local casualties. A number of leaders demanded a restart of the conflict, and the Israeli parliament approved a initial resolution to incorporate the West Bank. The American reaction was somewhere ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in various respects, the Trump administration seems more concentrated on maintaining the present, uneasy period of the peace than on moving to the subsequent: the rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip. Concerning that, it looks the US may have aspirations but little concrete plans.

For now, it remains unclear when the planned international governing body will truly take power, and the similar applies to the proposed peacekeeping troops – or even the composition of its members. On a recent day, a US official said the US would not dictate the structure of the foreign unit on the Israeli government. But if the prime minister's cabinet keeps to dismiss multiple options – as it did with the Ankara's offer recently – what occurs next? There is also the reverse question: which party will determine whether the units favoured by the Israelis are even interested in the task?

The matter of how long it will require to neutralize Hamas is equally vague. “Our hope in the administration is that the global peacekeeping unit is going to at this point take charge in demilitarizing Hamas,” remarked Vance lately. “That’s may need some time.” The former president only reinforced the lack of clarity, declaring in an interview recently that there is no “rigid” schedule for Hamas to disarm. So, theoretically, the unknown members of this still unformed international force could enter Gaza while Hamas members still hold power. Would they be facing a governing body or a guerrilla movement? Among the many of the concerns arising. Others might ask what the verdict will be for ordinary Palestinians under current conditions, with the group continuing to attack its own opponents and dissidents.

Recent incidents have yet again underscored the omissions of Israeli journalism on both sides of the Gaza border. Each publication seeks to examine every possible perspective of Hamas’s violations of the truce. And, in general, the fact that the organization has been hindering the repatriation of the remains of slain Israeli hostages has taken over the news.

On the other hand, attention of non-combatant fatalities in the region resulting from Israeli operations has garnered scant attention – if any. Consider the Israeli retaliatory strikes after a recent Rafah occurrence, in which two military personnel were fatally wounded. While local sources reported 44 casualties, Israeli media commentators criticised the “light answer,” which targeted just facilities.

This is not new. Over the past few days, Gaza’s media office alleged Israeli forces of violating the peace with Hamas multiple occasions after the ceasefire began, resulting in the loss of dozens of individuals and injuring an additional many more. The claim was unimportant to most Israeli reporting – it was just absent. Even accounts that 11 individuals of a Palestinian household were fatally shot by Israeli forces last Friday.

The rescue organization said the group had been attempting to go back to their residence in the a Gaza City district of Gaza City when the transport they were in was attacked for allegedly passing the “demarcation line” that defines areas under Israeli army control. That yellow line is not visible to the ordinary view and shows up just on plans and in government papers – sometimes not available to everyday residents in the territory.

Yet that event hardly rated a note in Israeli journalism. One source mentioned it in passing on its website, quoting an Israeli military representative who said that after a suspicious vehicle was spotted, forces fired warning shots towards it, “but the car persisted to approach the troops in a manner that created an direct risk to them. The troops engaged to eliminate the risk, in line with the truce.” No fatalities were reported.

With such perspective, it is little wonder a lot of Israeli citizens believe Hamas solely is to blame for breaking the truce. This view threatens prompting calls for a stronger stance in Gaza.

At some point – maybe in the near future – it will not be adequate for US envoys to take on the role of caretakers, instructing the Israeli government what to refrain from. They will {have to|need