🔗 Share this article

These days present a quite distinctive phenomenon: the pioneering US march of the babysitters. Their qualifications differ in their skills and attributes, but they all share the common goal – to avert an Israeli infringement, or even devastation, of the fragile truce. Since the war ended, there have been rare days without at least one of the former president's representatives on the scene. Only in the last few days saw the arrival of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and a political figure – all appearing to perform their duties.

Israel keeps them busy. In only a few days it initiated a set of operations in Gaza after the deaths of a pair of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers – resulting, as reported, in scores of Palestinian injuries. A number of officials called for a resumption of the fighting, and the Knesset enacted a initial measure to incorporate the West Bank. The American stance was somewhere between “no” and “hell no.”

But in various respects, the Trump administration appears more concentrated on preserving the current, unstable period of the truce than on progressing to the following: the rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip. Regarding this, it looks the US may have aspirations but little tangible proposals.

Currently, it remains unknown at what point the suggested international governing body will actually assume control, and the same goes for the appointed security force – or even the makeup of its soldiers. On Tuesday, Vance said the United States would not force the membership of the foreign contingent on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet keeps to dismiss multiple options – as it acted with the Ankara's offer recently – what happens then? There is also the opposite point: which party will decide whether the units favoured by the Israelis are even interested in the assignment?

The matter of the duration it will require to demilitarize Hamas is just as unclear. “The aim in the leadership is that the global peacekeeping unit is intends to at this point take charge in demilitarizing the organization,” remarked the official this week. “It’s may need some time.” The former president further highlighted the uncertainty, stating in an interview on Sunday that there is no “rigid” deadline for Hamas to disarm. So, hypothetically, the unnamed elements of this yet-to-be-formed global contingent could deploy to the territory while the organization's members continue to remain in control. Are they facing a governing body or a militant faction? Among the many of the issues emerging. Others might ask what the result will be for average civilians under current conditions, with the group carrying on to attack its own adversaries and dissidents.

Recent developments have yet again underscored the blind spots of Israeli reporting on both sides of the Gaza border. Each publication attempts to scrutinize all conceivable perspective of the group's breaches of the ceasefire. And, in general, the situation that the organization has been hindering the return of the bodies of slain Israeli hostages has monopolized the headlines.

By contrast, coverage of civilian casualties in the region caused by Israeli attacks has received scant notice – if any. Consider the Israeli response attacks in the wake of a recent Rafah occurrence, in which two soldiers were lost. While local officials reported dozens of casualties, Israeli television pundits criticised the “moderate answer,” which hit only infrastructure.

That is nothing new. Over the previous few days, the press agency accused Israeli forces of breaking the truce with the group multiple occasions since the ceasefire came into effect, resulting in the loss of dozens of Palestinians and injuring another many more. The assertion appeared unimportant to the majority of Israeli reporting – it was merely ignored. This applied to accounts that eleven members of a Palestinian family were fatally shot by Israeli troops a few days ago.

The civil defence agency said the group had been attempting to go back to their dwelling in the Zeitoun district of Gaza City when the transport they were in was attacked for supposedly crossing the “boundary” that defines zones under Israeli military authority. This yellow line is invisible to the naked eye and is visible just on plans and in official documents – not always available to everyday residents in the area.

Even that occurrence scarcely rated a mention in Israeli journalism. One source covered it shortly on its website, referencing an Israeli military official who explained that after a suspicious car was identified, troops shot cautionary rounds towards it, “but the vehicle continued to advance on the troops in a fashion that created an immediate risk to them. The soldiers engaged to remove the danger, in line with the agreement.” No fatalities were stated.

With such perspective, it is little wonder a lot of Israeli citizens think the group alone is to responsible for violating the peace. That perception risks fuelling demands for a tougher strategy in Gaza.

Sooner or later – maybe in the near future – it will not be adequate for American representatives to play supervisors, instructing the Israeli government what to refrain from. They will {have to|need