🔗 Share this article

Thhese days showcase a very unique situation: the inaugural US procession of the babysitters. Their qualifications differ in their skills and traits, but they all possess the identical mission – to stop an Israeli breach, or even destruction, of Gaza’s delicate truce. After the war concluded, there have been few days without at least one of Donald Trump’s representatives on the scene. Only in the last few days included the likes of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and a political figure – all coming to carry out their roles.

The Israeli government occupies their time. In just a few days it launched a series of operations in the region after the loss of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers – resulting, according to reports, in many of local casualties. Multiple officials demanded a renewal of the war, and the Knesset passed a initial resolution to incorporate the West Bank. The US reaction was somehow ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

However in more than one sense, the Trump administration appears more focused on maintaining the existing, tense phase of the truce than on moving to the following: the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip. When it comes to that, it seems the US may have goals but few tangible proposals.

At present, it remains unclear when the planned multinational oversight committee will truly take power, and the similar applies to the proposed military contingent – or even the makeup of its members. On a recent day, Vance stated the United States would not force the membership of the international unit on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s government persists to reject various proposals – as it acted with the Turkish suggestion this week – what occurs next? There is also the opposite question: which party will determine whether the troops supported by the Israelis are even willing in the mission?

The question of the duration it will need to disarm the militant group is just as unclear. “The aim in the administration is that the global peacekeeping unit is going to at this point take the lead in disarming the organization,” said Vance lately. “It’s going to take a period.” The former president only emphasized the ambiguity, declaring in an interview recently that there is no “rigid” deadline for the group to lay down arms. So, theoretically, the unidentified members of this still unformed global contingent could enter Gaza while the organization's members still wield influence. Would they be facing a leadership or a militant faction? These represent only some of the issues arising. Some might question what the verdict will be for ordinary civilians in the present situation, with the group carrying on to target its own opponents and dissidents.

Latest developments have once again emphasized the blind spots of local media coverage on the two sides of the Gaza frontier. Each source seeks to scrutinize every possible aspect of the group's breaches of the truce. And, in general, the situation that Hamas has been stalling the repatriation of the bodies of deceased Israeli captives has monopolized the news.

By contrast, coverage of civilian casualties in Gaza caused by Israeli strikes has garnered scant notice – or none. Take the Israeli counter strikes following Sunday’s southern Gaza occurrence, in which a pair of soldiers were killed. While Gaza’s sources stated dozens of fatalities, Israeli news commentators questioned the “light answer,” which focused on just facilities.

This is nothing new. During the recent few days, the media office charged Israel of violating the peace with Hamas 47 occasions after the ceasefire began, resulting in the loss of dozens of Palestinians and wounding another 143. The assertion appeared irrelevant to most Israeli media outlets – it was merely absent. That included accounts that eleven individuals of a local family were killed by Israeli troops a few days ago.

Gaza’s civil defence agency reported the group had been attempting to return to their residence in the Zeitoun area of Gaza City when the vehicle they were in was attacked for reportedly crossing the “boundary” that demarcates zones under Israeli military control. That limit is not visible to the naked eye and is visible just on maps and in official papers – often not accessible to average residents in the region.

Even this event barely rated a mention in Israeli journalism. A major outlet referred to it in passing on its digital site, citing an IDF spokesperson who stated that after a suspect vehicle was detected, troops shot alerting fire towards it, “but the vehicle kept to move toward the soldiers in a way that posed an immediate risk to them. The forces engaged to remove the risk, in line with the agreement.” No fatalities were stated.

With such narrative, it is no surprise numerous Israeli citizens think the group alone is to at fault for violating the truce. That perception threatens prompting appeals for a tougher approach in the region.

Eventually – possibly in the near future – it will no longer be adequate for all the president’s men to take on the role of caretakers, instructing the Israeli government what to refrain from. They will {have to|need