🔗 Share this article

Thhese times exhibit a quite unusual situation: the pioneering US march of the babysitters. They vary in their expertise and attributes, but they all share the same goal – to stop an Israeli infringement, or even destruction, of the unstable peace agreement. After the hostilities concluded, there have been few days without at least one of Donald Trump’s representatives on the scene. Only in the last few days saw the likes of a senior advisor, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all appearing to carry out their roles.

Israel keeps them busy. In just a few short period it executed a series of strikes in Gaza after the killings of a pair of Israeli military troops – leading, according to reports, in dozens of local casualties. A number of ministers called for a renewal of the war, and the Israeli parliament enacted a early resolution to take over the West Bank. The US reaction was somewhere between “no” and “hell no.”

However in various respects, the American government appears more concentrated on preserving the current, uneasy phase of the peace than on progressing to the following: the reconstruction of Gaza. When it comes to this, it looks the United States may have ambitions but little concrete strategies.

At present, it is unclear at what point the proposed global administrative entity will actually assume control, and the similar goes for the proposed security force – or even the composition of its members. On a recent day, a US official said the United States would not dictate the composition of the international force on Israel. But if the prime minister's administration keeps to refuse various proposals – as it did with the Ankara's proposal recently – what occurs next? There is also the opposite question: who will establish whether the units supported by Israel are even willing in the assignment?

The issue of how long it will take to disarm Hamas is similarly ambiguous. “The aim in the leadership is that the multinational troops is will at this point assume responsibility in demilitarizing Hamas,” remarked Vance recently. “That’s will require a period.” The former president further highlighted the ambiguity, stating in an interview recently that there is no “hard” deadline for Hamas to disarm. So, theoretically, the unidentified members of this yet-to-be-formed international contingent could arrive in the territory while the organization's members continue to hold power. Are they confronting a leadership or a insurgent group? These represent only some of the questions emerging. Others might question what the verdict will be for everyday Palestinians under current conditions, with Hamas continuing to target its own opponents and critics.

Recent events have once again emphasized the gaps of local media coverage on both sides of the Gaza border. Every outlet attempts to examine every possible angle of the group's violations of the truce. And, in general, the fact that the organization has been hindering the repatriation of the remains of deceased Israeli hostages has dominated the news.

On the other hand, coverage of civilian casualties in the region caused by Israeli attacks has obtained scant focus – if at all. Consider the Israeli retaliatory strikes following Sunday’s Rafah incident, in which two military personnel were killed. While local officials reported 44 casualties, Israeli television analysts questioned the “moderate response,” which focused on only facilities.

That is nothing new. During the recent weekend, the media office alleged Israel of violating the truce with Hamas 47 occasions since the truce began, killing dozens of individuals and harming an additional 143. The assertion appeared unimportant to the majority of Israeli reporting – it was merely ignored. That included reports that 11 members of a Palestinian household were killed by Israeli soldiers recently.

The civil defence agency stated the individuals had been seeking to return to their residence in the Zeitoun area of the city when the transport they were in was attacked for allegedly going over the “demarcation line” that marks territories under Israeli army command. This limit is unseen to the human eye and appears only on plans and in official records – often not obtainable to everyday people in the region.

Yet that incident hardly rated a note in Israeli journalism. A major outlet mentioned it in passing on its online platform, citing an IDF representative who explained that after a suspect transport was identified, troops shot warning shots towards it, “but the car kept to approach the troops in a way that posed an direct danger to them. The soldiers engaged to eliminate the risk, in line with the agreement.” Zero fatalities were claimed.

Amid such framing, it is understandable a lot of Israeli citizens believe Hamas exclusively is to at fault for breaking the truce. That perception could lead to prompting calls for a more aggressive strategy in the region.

Eventually – possibly sooner than expected – it will no longer be adequate for American representatives to act as caretakers, telling Israel what to refrain from. They will {have to|need