🔗 Share this article

Thhese times showcase a very distinctive situation: the inaugural US procession of the babysitters. Their qualifications differ in their qualifications and attributes, but they all have the identical mission – to prevent an Israeli violation, or even destruction, of Gaza’s delicate truce. Since the hostilities concluded, there have been scant days without at least one of the former president's envoys on the ground. Only recently saw the presence of a senior advisor, Steve Witkoff, a senator and a political figure – all arriving to perform their duties.

The Israeli government engages them fully. In only a few short period it launched a set of operations in Gaza after the killings of a pair of Israeli military personnel – resulting, as reported, in scores of local fatalities. Several ministers urged a restart of the war, and the Israeli parliament passed a early resolution to incorporate the West Bank. The American response was somewhere ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

But in several ways, the US leadership seems more concentrated on maintaining the current, unstable period of the peace than on progressing to the subsequent: the rebuilding of Gaza. Concerning that, it appears the United States may have ambitions but no specific strategies.

At present, it remains unclear at what point the suggested international administrative entity will truly begin operating, and the same is true for the proposed military contingent – or even the identity of its members. On a recent day, a US official stated the US would not dictate the composition of the foreign contingent on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet continues to reject one alternative after another – as it acted with the Turkish suggestion lately – what follows? There is also the opposite issue: who will determine whether the forces supported by the Israelis are even willing in the assignment?

The issue of the timeframe it will require to demilitarize Hamas is just as unclear. “Our hope in the administration is that the international security force is going to at this point assume responsibility in demilitarizing the organization,” remarked Vance recently. “That’s will require some time.” Trump only reinforced the uncertainty, saying in an conversation on Sunday that there is no “hard” deadline for the group to demilitarize. So, in theory, the unnamed participants of this not yet established international contingent could arrive in Gaza while the organization's members continue to hold power. Are they confronting a governing body or a insurgent group? These represent only some of the concerns surfacing. Some might ask what the outcome will be for average Palestinians in the present situation, with Hamas persisting to target its own adversaries and dissidents.

Recent developments have afresh highlighted the blind spots of local reporting on both sides of the Gazan boundary. Every publication seeks to scrutinize all conceivable angle of the group's infractions of the truce. And, in general, the situation that the organization has been delaying the repatriation of the remains of killed Israeli hostages has monopolized the headlines.

By contrast, attention of civilian casualties in Gaza stemming from Israeli strikes has obtained little focus – if any. Take the Israeli retaliatory strikes following Sunday’s southern Gaza incident, in which two military personnel were lost. While local authorities stated dozens of fatalities, Israeli news pundits questioned the “moderate answer,” which targeted just infrastructure.

That is typical. Over the recent few days, the media office alleged Israeli forces of breaking the truce with the group multiple times after the agreement began, causing the death of 38 Palestinians and wounding an additional many more. The assertion was unimportant to most Israeli reporting – it was simply absent. That included information that 11 members of a Palestinian household were lost their lives by Israeli forces a few days ago.

Gaza’s emergency services stated the family had been trying to return to their home in the Zeitoun area of the city when the transport they were in was attacked for supposedly going over the “demarcation line” that defines zones under Israeli army control. That boundary is unseen to the naked eye and appears just on charts and in government documents – often not available to everyday individuals in the region.

Even this incident hardly received a mention in Israeli news outlets. A major outlet covered it shortly on its website, citing an Israeli military representative who said that after a suspect vehicle was spotted, soldiers fired alerting fire towards it, “but the vehicle continued to approach the forces in a manner that created an immediate risk to them. The troops engaged to neutralize the danger, in line with the ceasefire.” Zero fatalities were stated.

With such framing, it is understandable many Israelis feel Hamas exclusively is to blame for breaking the truce. This belief could lead to encouraging appeals for a stronger approach in the region.

Eventually – maybe in the near future – it will not be sufficient for all the president’s men to act as kindergarten teachers, instructing the Israeli government what not to do. They will {have to|need