🔗 Share this article

Thhese times showcase a quite unusual situation: the pioneering US march of the caretakers. Their qualifications differ in their skills and characteristics, but they all have the identical mission – to avert an Israeli violation, or even demolition, of the delicate truce. Since the war finished, there have been few days without at least one of the former president's representatives on the territory. Just in the last few days saw the arrival of a senior advisor, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and a political figure – all arriving to carry out their assignments.

The Israeli government keeps them busy. In just a few short period it initiated a series of strikes in the region after the loss of a pair of Israeli military troops – resulting, based on accounts, in dozens of Palestinian casualties. A number of ministers urged a resumption of the fighting, and the Knesset enacted a initial decision to annex the occupied territories. The US response was somehow between “no” and “hell no.”

But in several ways, the US leadership seems more intent on preserving the present, unstable stage of the ceasefire than on advancing to the next: the rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip. Concerning this, it seems the United States may have goals but no specific proposals.

Currently, it is unclear at what point the planned multinational oversight committee will actually begin operating, and the similar applies to the appointed peacekeeping troops – or even the composition of its personnel. On a recent day, a US official said the United States would not impose the membership of the foreign unit on the Israeli government. But if the prime minister's administration keeps to reject various proposals – as it did with the Ankara's suggestion recently – what follows? There is also the reverse question: which party will determine whether the forces supported by Israel are even willing in the mission?

The matter of the timeframe it will need to demilitarize Hamas is similarly unclear. “Our hope in the leadership is that the international security force is going to at this point take the lead in demilitarizing Hamas,” stated Vance this week. “That’s will require some time.” The former president only emphasized the uncertainty, stating in an interview a few days ago that there is no “hard” timeline for Hamas to disarm. So, hypothetically, the unknown participants of this not yet established international force could enter the territory while Hamas fighters continue to hold power. Would they be dealing with a governing body or a militant faction? These are just a few of the concerns surfacing. Others might wonder what the verdict will be for everyday civilians under current conditions, with the group persisting to target its own political rivals and opposition.

Recent events have yet again emphasized the omissions of Israeli reporting on both sides of the Gaza boundary. Each outlet attempts to examine each potential perspective of the group's violations of the ceasefire. And, usually, the fact that Hamas has been stalling the return of the bodies of slain Israeli hostages has monopolized the headlines.

On the other hand, coverage of civilian deaths in Gaza stemming from Israeli strikes has received little attention – if any. Consider the Israeli counter actions after a recent southern Gaza event, in which two soldiers were lost. While local officials stated dozens of casualties, Israeli news analysts criticised the “limited response,” which targeted solely infrastructure.

That is typical. During the previous few days, Gaza’s media office accused Israeli forces of breaking the peace with Hamas 47 times after the agreement came into effect, killing dozens of individuals and wounding another many more. The allegation seemed unimportant to most Israeli news programmes – it was merely ignored. This applied to accounts that eleven members of a Palestinian family were killed by Israeli troops recently.

The civil defence agency stated the group had been seeking to return to their residence in the a Gaza City area of the city when the vehicle they were in was targeted for supposedly passing the “yellow line” that defines areas under Israeli army control. That yellow line is not visible to the human eye and is visible only on plans and in official records – sometimes not accessible to ordinary individuals in the region.

Yet that event barely got a note in Israeli journalism. One source covered it shortly on its online platform, quoting an Israeli military official who said that after a suspicious vehicle was identified, forces discharged cautionary rounds towards it, “but the transport continued to advance on the forces in a way that posed an imminent danger to them. The forces opened fire to eliminate the risk, in accordance with the truce.” No fatalities were stated.

Given such perspective, it is no surprise many Israelis think Hamas exclusively is to responsible for breaking the peace. This belief could lead to fuelling appeals for a tougher strategy in the region.

Sooner or later – maybe in the near future – it will no longer be sufficient for all the president’s men to play kindergarten teachers, telling the Israeli government what not to do. They will {have to|need