🔗 Share this article

These days showcase a very unique occurrence: the inaugural US parade of the caretakers. Their attributes range in their skills and attributes, but they all have the same objective – to prevent an Israeli infringement, or even devastation, of Gaza’s unstable truce. After the conflict concluded, there have been scant days without at least one of Donald Trump’s representatives on the scene. Only this past week saw the arrival of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all appearing to execute their duties.

Israel occupies their time. In only a few days it executed a wave of strikes in Gaza after the loss of a pair of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops – leading, based on accounts, in scores of local casualties. A number of officials called for a renewal of the war, and the Israeli parliament passed a preliminary decision to annex the occupied territories. The American response was somehow ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in various respects, the American government appears more concentrated on preserving the current, uneasy phase of the truce than on advancing to the next: the reconstruction of Gaza. When it comes to this, it appears the United States may have ambitions but no tangible proposals.

For now, it remains unclear at what point the proposed multinational oversight committee will truly begin operating, and the same is true for the designated military contingent – or even the makeup of its soldiers. On a recent day, a US official stated the US would not force the structure of the foreign unit on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s administration continues to dismiss multiple options – as it acted with the Turkish proposal lately – what happens then? There is also the contrary issue: who will decide whether the troops preferred by the Israelis are even prepared in the assignment?

The issue of the timeframe it will need to disarm the militant group is similarly unclear. “Our hope in the administration is that the international security force is will at this point assume responsibility in disarming Hamas,” stated the official this week. “That’s may need a while.” Trump further emphasized the uncertainty, stating in an conversation on Sunday that there is no “fixed” schedule for Hamas to demilitarize. So, hypothetically, the unknown members of this not yet established global contingent could deploy to the territory while the organization's members continue to hold power. Would they be dealing with a administration or a insurgent group? These are just a few of the issues emerging. Some might wonder what the result will be for average Palestinians under current conditions, with the group continuing to target its own adversaries and critics.

Latest developments have yet again highlighted the gaps of local journalism on each side of the Gazan frontier. Each publication strives to scrutinize each potential aspect of the group's infractions of the truce. And, typically, the fact that Hamas has been hindering the repatriation of the bodies of slain Israeli captives has monopolized the coverage.

Conversely, coverage of civilian fatalities in Gaza stemming from Israeli strikes has received scant attention – if any. Take the Israeli response actions after a recent Rafah occurrence, in which two military personnel were fatally wounded. While local officials claimed 44 fatalities, Israeli television commentators questioned the “limited reaction,” which targeted solely installations.

That is typical. During the past weekend, the information bureau charged Israeli forces of infringing the peace with Hamas 47 times since the truce came into effect, causing the death of dozens of individuals and wounding an additional many more. The claim appeared unimportant to the majority of Israeli news programmes – it was merely absent. That included accounts that 11 individuals of a Palestinian household were lost their lives by Israeli troops last Friday.

Gaza’s rescue organization said the group had been seeking to return to their dwelling in the a Gaza City area of Gaza City when the vehicle they were in was targeted for supposedly going over the “demarcation line” that defines areas under Israeli military authority. This yellow line is not visible to the ordinary view and appears just on charts and in official documents – not always accessible to everyday residents in the area.

Yet that event scarcely got a reference in Israeli news outlets. A major outlet referred to it briefly on its website, citing an IDF official who stated that after a suspicious vehicle was spotted, soldiers discharged warning shots towards it, “but the transport continued to move toward the soldiers in a manner that caused an imminent risk to them. The soldiers shot to neutralize the threat, in accordance with the agreement.” No injuries were reported.

With such narrative, it is little wonder many Israelis feel Hamas exclusively is to at fault for infringing the ceasefire. That view risks encouraging appeals for a stronger approach in Gaza.

Sooner or later – perhaps sooner than expected – it will no longer be enough for American representatives to act as supervisors, instructing the Israeli government what to avoid. They will {have to|need