🔗 Share this article

These days present a quite distinctive occurrence: the first-ever US march of the caretakers. They vary in their expertise and attributes, but they all share the identical objective – to prevent an Israeli violation, or even devastation, of Gaza’s fragile ceasefire. After the hostilities finished, there have been rare days without at least one of Donald Trump’s representatives on the ground. Just recently saw the presence of a senior advisor, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and a political figure – all arriving to perform their roles.

The Israeli government keeps them busy. In just a few short period it executed a wave of strikes in Gaza after the killings of a pair of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) personnel – leading, according to reports, in many of Palestinian fatalities. Multiple officials demanded a restart of the war, and the Israeli parliament enacted a preliminary measure to incorporate the West Bank. The American response was somehow between “no” and “hell no.”

But in various respects, the American government appears more intent on upholding the existing, uneasy stage of the truce than on moving to the subsequent: the rebuilding of the Gaza Strip. Concerning that, it appears the United States may have aspirations but little concrete plans.

For now, it remains unclear at what point the proposed global oversight committee will effectively begin operating, and the same goes for the designated peacekeeping troops – or even the composition of its personnel. On a recent day, Vance declared the US would not force the membership of the foreign contingent on the Israeli government. But if the prime minister's administration keeps to reject various proposals – as it acted with the Ankara's suggestion lately – what follows? There is also the contrary point: who will decide whether the units supported by the Israelis are even interested in the mission?

The issue of how long it will need to disarm Hamas is equally unclear. “The aim in the administration is that the global peacekeeping unit is going to at this point take the lead in neutralizing the organization,” said Vance lately. “That’s going to take a while.” Trump only highlighted the uncertainty, saying in an interview on Sunday that there is no “fixed” schedule for Hamas to lay down arms. So, theoretically, the unnamed elements of this not yet established global force could enter Gaza while Hamas militants continue to remain in control. Would they be dealing with a governing body or a insurgent group? These represent only some of the questions arising. Others might ask what the verdict will be for average civilians as things stand, with the group continuing to attack its own political rivals and dissidents.

Recent developments have afresh emphasized the gaps of local media coverage on the two sides of the Gazan border. Every publication seeks to scrutinize each potential angle of the group's breaches of the truce. And, usually, the reality that Hamas has been stalling the return of the remains of slain Israeli hostages has taken over the headlines.

On the other hand, reporting of non-combatant casualties in the region caused by Israeli operations has obtained minimal attention – if at all. Take the Israeli retaliatory attacks in the wake of Sunday’s southern Gaza event, in which two military personnel were lost. While local authorities reported 44 deaths, Israeli media commentators criticised the “moderate response,” which focused on just infrastructure.

That is nothing new. Over the previous weekend, the information bureau alleged Israel of breaking the truce with the group 47 occasions after the truce began, causing the death of 38 individuals and wounding another 143. The claim seemed insignificant to the majority of Israeli media outlets – it was just absent. Even accounts that eleven individuals of a local household were fatally shot by Israeli soldiers last Friday.

The emergency services said the family had been trying to return to their home in the Zeitoun area of the city when the vehicle they were in was fired upon for supposedly going over the “boundary” that marks areas under Israeli military control. That yellow line is unseen to the naked eye and shows up just on plans and in government records – sometimes not available to everyday individuals in the region.

Yet this event scarcely got a mention in Israeli news outlets. A major outlet referred to it shortly on its digital site, referencing an IDF representative who stated that after a suspicious vehicle was detected, forces fired warning shots towards it, “but the vehicle continued to approach the soldiers in a fashion that created an direct threat to them. The troops shot to eliminate the danger, in line with the ceasefire.” Zero injuries were claimed.

With such framing, it is understandable a lot of Israeli citizens believe the group exclusively is to blame for breaking the truce. This belief risks encouraging appeals for a tougher approach in the region.

Sooner or later – perhaps in the near future – it will not be enough for all the president’s men to act as supervisors, telling Israel what not to do. They will {have to|need