🔗 Share this article

These times present a quite distinctive situation: the first-ever US march of the caretakers. Their attributes range in their expertise and attributes, but they all share the identical mission – to stop an Israeli breach, or even devastation, of Gaza’s delicate ceasefire. Since the war ended, there have been rare occasions without at least one of Donald Trump’s delegates on the ground. Just in the last few days saw the presence of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all arriving to execute their duties.

Israel keeps them busy. In only a few short period it executed a series of operations in Gaza after the deaths of a pair of Israeli military troops – resulting, based on accounts, in dozens of Palestinian injuries. Several officials called for a restart of the conflict, and the Israeli parliament enacted a preliminary resolution to annex the occupied territories. The American response was somehow ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in various respects, the American government seems more concentrated on maintaining the present, uneasy period of the ceasefire than on progressing to the following: the reconstruction of Gaza. Regarding this, it appears the United States may have goals but no specific strategies.

At present, it is unknown at what point the suggested international oversight committee will truly assume control, and the similar is true for the designated peacekeeping troops – or even the composition of its soldiers. On Tuesday, a US official stated the United States would not force the structure of the international contingent on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet continues to dismiss one alternative after another – as it acted with the Ankara's suggestion recently – what occurs next? There is also the reverse issue: which party will decide whether the troops preferred by Israel are even prepared in the assignment?

The issue of how long it will need to disarm Hamas is equally ambiguous. “Our hope in the government is that the global peacekeeping unit is going to at this point assume responsibility in demilitarizing the organization,” remarked the official lately. “That’s may need a while.” Trump further reinforced the ambiguity, saying in an discussion on Sunday that there is no “hard” schedule for the group to disarm. So, theoretically, the unidentified participants of this not yet established international contingent could deploy to Gaza while the organization's militants continue to hold power. Would they be confronting a administration or a insurgent group? These represent only some of the concerns arising. Some might question what the verdict will be for average civilians as things stand, with the group carrying on to focus on its own opponents and critics.

Current developments have afresh emphasized the blind spots of Israeli media coverage on the two sides of the Gaza border. Each outlet seeks to analyze each potential angle of Hamas’s breaches of the ceasefire. And, in general, the fact that the organization has been delaying the return of the remains of deceased Israeli captives has monopolized the news.

On the other hand, reporting of non-combatant deaths in Gaza caused by Israeli operations has received scant notice – if any. Consider the Israeli retaliatory strikes following Sunday’s Rafah occurrence, in which two military personnel were killed. While Gaza’s authorities reported 44 deaths, Israeli media commentators complained about the “limited response,” which focused on just facilities.

That is typical. Over the previous weekend, the information bureau charged Israeli forces of violating the ceasefire with Hamas multiple occasions after the agreement came into effect, resulting in the loss of dozens of Palestinians and harming an additional many more. The allegation was irrelevant to the majority of Israeli media outlets – it was just absent. This applied to reports that eleven individuals of a Palestinian household were killed by Israeli forces last Friday.

Gaza’s civil defence agency stated the group had been attempting to return to their dwelling in the Zeitoun neighbourhood of Gaza City when the vehicle they were in was targeted for reportedly passing the “demarcation line” that defines areas under Israeli army control. That boundary is invisible to the naked eye and shows up only on charts and in authoritative documents – often not obtainable to ordinary residents in the territory.

Even that occurrence scarcely received a note in Israeli news outlets. One source referred to it briefly on its digital site, citing an Israeli military spokesperson who explained that after a suspect vehicle was detected, forces shot cautionary rounds towards it, “but the car persisted to advance on the troops in a way that created an direct threat to them. The forces opened fire to remove the threat, in line with the ceasefire.” No fatalities were stated.

Given this perspective, it is understandable many Israelis feel the group exclusively is to responsible for breaking the truce. This perception could lead to prompting demands for a more aggressive stance in the region.

Sooner or later – maybe in the near future – it will not be sufficient for all the president’s men to act as kindergarten teachers, instructing the Israeli government what to refrain from. They will {have to|need