🔗 Share this article

Thhese days exhibit a very unusual phenomenon: the pioneering US procession of the babysitters. Their qualifications differ in their skills and traits, but they all share the identical goal – to prevent an Israeli infringement, or even demolition, of Gaza’s fragile ceasefire. After the conflict concluded, there have been few days without at least one of the former president's envoys on the territory. Only this past week saw the likes of a senior advisor, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and a political figure – all coming to perform their duties.

Israel engages them fully. In only a few short period it launched a set of strikes in Gaza after the deaths of a pair of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers – leading, as reported, in dozens of local injuries. Several officials demanded a resumption of the fighting, and the Knesset passed a early decision to take over the occupied territories. The American response was somewhere ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in several ways, the Trump administration seems more focused on maintaining the existing, uneasy phase of the truce than on moving to the following: the rebuilding of the Gaza Strip. When it comes to that, it seems the US may have goals but few concrete proposals.

For now, it remains uncertain at what point the proposed international oversight committee will actually assume control, and the identical goes for the appointed peacekeeping troops – or even the identity of its personnel. On Tuesday, a US official said the United States would not force the structure of the foreign unit on the Israeli government. But if the prime minister's cabinet continues to dismiss various proposals – as it did with the Turkish suggestion lately – what follows? There is also the reverse point: which party will establish whether the troops preferred by the Israelis are even prepared in the task?

The question of how long it will take to neutralize the militant group is equally ambiguous. “The expectation in the leadership is that the international security force is will at this point assume responsibility in demilitarizing the organization,” said Vance recently. “It’s may need some time.” The former president further emphasized the ambiguity, declaring in an interview recently that there is no “hard” schedule for Hamas to demilitarize. So, hypothetically, the unidentified participants of this not yet established international contingent could enter the territory while Hamas fighters still remain in control. Are they dealing with a administration or a insurgent group? These represent only some of the issues arising. Others might question what the result will be for everyday civilians under current conditions, with the group continuing to focus on its own opponents and dissidents.

Latest events have yet again underscored the gaps of Israeli media coverage on both sides of the Gaza border. Each source strives to examine every possible perspective of Hamas’s violations of the peace. And, in general, the fact that the organization has been delaying the repatriation of the bodies of killed Israeli captives has dominated the coverage.

By contrast, reporting of non-combatant fatalities in Gaza stemming from Israeli operations has obtained scant attention – or none. Consider the Israeli counter attacks in the wake of a recent Rafah occurrence, in which two troops were killed. While Gaza’s sources claimed dozens of fatalities, Israeli media analysts criticised the “limited answer,” which targeted just facilities.

This is typical. Over the recent weekend, Gaza’s press agency accused Israel of violating the truce with Hamas multiple occasions after the truce came into effect, resulting in the loss of dozens of Palestinians and injuring an additional many more. The claim appeared insignificant to most Israeli reporting – it was merely absent. This applied to reports that 11 members of a local household were fatally shot by Israeli troops last Friday.

Gaza’s emergency services said the family had been trying to return to their home in the a Gaza City area of Gaza City when the transport they were in was fired upon for supposedly passing the “yellow line” that marks areas under Israeli military control. That boundary is not visible to the ordinary view and shows up solely on maps and in authoritative records – not always available to average people in the area.

Even this incident barely received a note in Israeli journalism. A major outlet covered it shortly on its website, citing an IDF spokesperson who explained that after a questionable car was spotted, forces discharged cautionary rounds towards it, “but the transport persisted to approach the troops in a manner that posed an imminent threat to them. The troops shot to neutralize the threat, in compliance with the agreement.” No fatalities were stated.

Amid such perspective, it is no surprise numerous Israelis feel the group exclusively is to at fault for violating the ceasefire. This perception threatens prompting demands for a stronger approach in Gaza.

Eventually – maybe sooner than expected – it will no longer be sufficient for American representatives to play supervisors, advising the Israeli government what to refrain from. They will {have to|need