🔗 Share this article

Thhese days showcase a very distinctive situation: the inaugural US parade of the caretakers. They vary in their qualifications and characteristics, but they all possess the same goal – to prevent an Israeli infringement, or even destruction, of Gaza’s unstable ceasefire. Since the conflict ended, there have been rare days without at least one of the former president's delegates on the scene. Only recently featured the arrival of a senior advisor, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all arriving to execute their assignments.

The Israeli government engages them fully. In only a few short period it initiated a wave of strikes in the region after the killings of a pair of Israeli military soldiers – resulting, according to reports, in many of local fatalities. Multiple officials called for a resumption of the conflict, and the Israeli parliament passed a preliminary resolution to annex the occupied territories. The US reaction was somehow ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in more than one sense, the Trump administration appears more focused on preserving the existing, uneasy period of the peace than on moving to the subsequent: the rebuilding of the Gaza Strip. Concerning this, it appears the US may have goals but little tangible plans.

At present, it is unclear when the proposed multinational administrative entity will effectively begin operating, and the identical goes for the appointed military contingent – or even the identity of its members. On a recent day, Vance stated the United States would not dictate the structure of the foreign unit on Israel. But if the prime minister's cabinet continues to reject various proposals – as it acted with the Turkish proposal this week – what occurs next? There is also the reverse question: who will determine whether the troops preferred by Israel are even interested in the mission?

The question of the duration it will need to demilitarize Hamas is equally vague. “The expectation in the administration is that the global peacekeeping unit is intends to at this point take the lead in demilitarizing the organization,” remarked Vance this week. “That’s going to take some time.” Trump further emphasized the ambiguity, declaring in an interview a few days ago that there is no “fixed” deadline for the group to disarm. So, in theory, the unnamed members of this yet-to-be-formed global contingent could deploy to the territory while Hamas militants still hold power. Would they be dealing with a governing body or a guerrilla movement? These are just a few of the concerns arising. Some might question what the result will be for average Palestinians under current conditions, with the group persisting to target its own adversaries and opposition.

Current developments have yet again underscored the omissions of Israeli media coverage on each side of the Gazan border. Each outlet attempts to examine every possible perspective of Hamas’s violations of the truce. And, in general, the fact that Hamas has been delaying the repatriation of the remains of deceased Israeli hostages has dominated the news.

By contrast, reporting of civilian casualties in Gaza caused by Israeli strikes has received scant notice – if any. Take the Israeli retaliatory attacks after Sunday’s southern Gaza incident, in which two troops were killed. While local officials claimed dozens of deaths, Israeli news commentators questioned the “moderate response,” which targeted solely facilities.

That is typical. Over the past few days, the media office charged Israeli forces of infringing the truce with Hamas multiple times after the agreement was implemented, causing the death of dozens of Palestinians and wounding another 143. The claim appeared irrelevant to most Israeli news programmes – it was just ignored. That included reports that eleven individuals of a local family were fatally shot by Israeli forces a few days ago.

Gaza’s rescue organization said the individuals had been trying to return to their residence in the Zeitoun district of Gaza City when the vehicle they were in was targeted for reportedly going over the “boundary” that marks territories under Israeli military control. This yellow line is invisible to the naked eye and shows up solely on charts and in official documents – not always available to ordinary individuals in the area.

Yet this event scarcely received a reference in Israeli news outlets. Channel 13 News covered it in passing on its website, referencing an Israeli military official who stated that after a suspect transport was identified, troops fired alerting fire towards it, “but the car kept to advance on the forces in a way that caused an imminent danger to them. The troops opened fire to eliminate the danger, in accordance with the truce.” Zero injuries were claimed.

With this perspective, it is understandable many Israelis believe the group alone is to at fault for violating the truce. This view risks prompting calls for a tougher approach in Gaza.

Eventually – possibly in the near future – it will not be enough for all the president’s men to act as kindergarten teachers, advising the Israeli government what not to do. They will {have to|need