🔗 Share this article

These times exhibit a very distinctive situation: the first-ever US march of the babysitters. Their attributes range in their expertise and traits, but they all possess the common objective – to avert an Israeli violation, or even demolition, of Gaza’s unstable truce. After the conflict finished, there have been scant days without at least one of Donald Trump’s envoys on the scene. Just recently saw the presence of Jared Kushner, a businessman, a senator and a political figure – all appearing to perform their duties.

Israel engages them fully. In just a few short period it initiated a series of attacks in the region after the loss of a pair of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers – resulting, according to reports, in many of local injuries. Several leaders urged a renewal of the conflict, and the Israeli parliament passed a initial decision to annex the West Bank. The US stance was somehow between “no” and “hell no.”

But in several ways, the Trump administration appears more focused on preserving the existing, tense period of the ceasefire than on moving to the subsequent: the rehabilitation of Gaza. When it comes to that, it appears the United States may have goals but no concrete proposals.

Currently, it is unknown at what point the suggested global administrative entity will truly take power, and the similar applies to the designated security force – or even the identity of its personnel. On a recent day, Vance said the United States would not dictate the structure of the foreign contingent on the Israeli government. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet persists to reject various proposals – as it acted with the Ankara's proposal this week – what follows? There is also the reverse issue: who will establish whether the forces supported by Israel are even prepared in the task?

The matter of how long it will take to disarm Hamas is equally ambiguous. “The expectation in the leadership is that the global peacekeeping unit is going to now take charge in demilitarizing the organization,” stated the official this week. “That’s will require some time.” The former president only reinforced the ambiguity, saying in an conversation a few days ago that there is no “rigid” schedule for the group to disarm. So, theoretically, the unknown participants of this yet-to-be-formed global contingent could enter Gaza while Hamas militants continue to remain in control. Would they be dealing with a governing body or a insurgent group? Among the many of the concerns surfacing. Others might question what the result will be for average residents under current conditions, with Hamas persisting to attack its own opponents and dissidents.

Recent incidents have once again highlighted the blind spots of local journalism on each side of the Gaza border. Every outlet strives to scrutinize all conceivable perspective of the group's infractions of the ceasefire. And, in general, the reality that the organization has been delaying the repatriation of the bodies of killed Israeli hostages has dominated the news.

By contrast, coverage of non-combatant fatalities in Gaza stemming from Israeli strikes has received little attention – if any. Take the Israeli retaliatory strikes following Sunday’s southern Gaza event, in which two soldiers were fatally wounded. While Gaza’s officials reported 44 fatalities, Israeli news analysts questioned the “limited reaction,” which focused on solely installations.

This is not new. Over the previous weekend, Gaza’s press agency accused Israel of breaking the peace with Hamas 47 occasions after the agreement began, causing the death of dozens of Palestinians and harming an additional 143. The claim appeared insignificant to most Israeli news programmes – it was just ignored. Even information that eleven individuals of a local family were lost their lives by Israeli forces recently.

Gaza’s emergency services reported the individuals had been attempting to return to their home in the Zeitoun area of Gaza City when the transport they were in was attacked for reportedly passing the “yellow line” that marks areas under Israeli army command. That yellow line is invisible to the human eye and is visible only on maps and in authoritative documents – sometimes not accessible to average people in the territory.

Yet that event hardly got a reference in Israeli news outlets. One source referred to it shortly on its website, quoting an Israeli military spokesperson who stated that after a suspicious transport was detected, soldiers discharged warning shots towards it, “but the vehicle persisted to move toward the forces in a way that created an direct risk to them. The soldiers shot to eliminate the risk, in accordance with the truce.” No casualties were stated.

Given such narrative, it is understandable numerous Israelis believe Hamas exclusively is to at fault for breaking the ceasefire. That view risks encouraging calls for a tougher stance in the region.

At some point – possibly in the near future – it will not be enough for all the president’s men to act as supervisors, advising the Israeli government what not to do. They will {have to|need