🔗 Share this article

Thhese times present a quite distinctive occurrence: the inaugural US procession of the caretakers. Their attributes range in their qualifications and traits, but they all share the same objective – to prevent an Israeli infringement, or even demolition, of the unstable ceasefire. Since the conflict concluded, there have been few occasions without at least one of Donald Trump’s delegates on the scene. Only this past week saw the presence of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all arriving to perform their duties.

The Israeli government keeps them busy. In just a few short period it executed a set of strikes in Gaza after the deaths of two Israeli military troops – leading, as reported, in many of local casualties. Multiple ministers demanded a renewal of the conflict, and the Knesset enacted a preliminary resolution to annex the occupied territories. The American reaction was somewhere ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

However in various respects, the Trump administration appears more intent on maintaining the present, unstable period of the peace than on progressing to the following: the rebuilding of Gaza. Concerning this, it looks the US may have ambitions but little tangible strategies.

For now, it is uncertain when the proposed international administrative entity will actually begin operating, and the similar applies to the proposed military contingent – or even the composition of its personnel. On Tuesday, Vance said the US would not force the membership of the foreign contingent on the Israeli government. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s administration persists to dismiss multiple options – as it acted with the Ankara's proposal recently – what occurs next? There is also the reverse point: which party will establish whether the units preferred by the Israelis are even interested in the mission?

The question of how long it will take to demilitarize Hamas is similarly unclear. “The aim in the leadership is that the multinational troops is going to now take the lead in demilitarizing Hamas,” said Vance this week. “It’s may need a period.” The former president only reinforced the uncertainty, stating in an conversation recently that there is no “rigid” deadline for Hamas to demilitarize. So, theoretically, the unnamed participants of this yet-to-be-formed international contingent could deploy to Gaza while Hamas fighters continue to wield influence. Would they be dealing with a leadership or a guerrilla movement? These represent only some of the issues emerging. Some might question what the outcome will be for ordinary Palestinians under current conditions, with the group carrying on to attack its own adversaries and dissidents.

Recent events have once again underscored the gaps of Israeli journalism on both sides of the Gazan boundary. Every outlet seeks to examine each potential aspect of Hamas’s breaches of the peace. And, typically, the fact that Hamas has been hindering the repatriation of the remains of killed Israeli hostages has monopolized the headlines.

By contrast, coverage of non-combatant casualties in Gaza caused by Israeli operations has obtained scant focus – or none. Consider the Israeli response strikes after Sunday’s Rafah event, in which a pair of troops were fatally wounded. While local authorities reported dozens of casualties, Israeli media pundits questioned the “light answer,” which hit only infrastructure.

That is not new. Over the past few days, the media office alleged Israeli forces of violating the truce with Hamas multiple times since the truce began, resulting in the loss of dozens of individuals and wounding another 143. The claim was insignificant to most Israeli reporting – it was just absent. This applied to accounts that eleven members of a local family were lost their lives by Israeli troops last Friday.

Gaza’s rescue organization said the family had been seeking to go back to their dwelling in the a Gaza City area of the city when the transport they were in was fired upon for supposedly crossing the “demarcation line” that defines territories under Israeli military control. That limit is unseen to the ordinary view and is visible solely on plans and in government records – sometimes not accessible to ordinary residents in the territory.

Yet this occurrence scarcely got a reference in Israeli media. A major outlet covered it shortly on its website, referencing an Israeli military representative who said that after a questionable vehicle was spotted, forces shot alerting fire towards it, “but the car continued to advance on the soldiers in a manner that caused an immediate risk to them. The soldiers engaged to neutralize the threat, in accordance with the truce.” Zero injuries were claimed.

With this perspective, it is understandable many Israelis think Hamas exclusively is to at fault for breaking the truce. This belief threatens fuelling calls for a more aggressive stance in the region.

At some point – maybe sooner rather than later – it will no longer be sufficient for all the president’s men to act as caretakers, advising the Israeli government what to refrain from. They will {have to|need