🔗 Share this article

These days present a quite distinctive phenomenon: the first-ever US parade of the caretakers. They vary in their skills and traits, but they all have the same objective – to prevent an Israeli infringement, or even destruction, of the delicate ceasefire. After the war ended, there have been few occasions without at least one of Donald Trump’s delegates on the ground. Only this past week saw the presence of a senior advisor, a businessman, JD Vance and a political figure – all coming to carry out their assignments.

The Israeli government keeps them busy. In just a few days it launched a series of strikes in the region after the loss of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers – leading, according to reports, in scores of local fatalities. Multiple leaders demanded a renewal of the conflict, and the Knesset approved a early decision to take over the occupied territories. The American response was somehow ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in several ways, the Trump administration seems more intent on preserving the present, tense period of the peace than on moving to the next: the rebuilding of the Gaza Strip. Regarding that, it appears the US may have ambitions but few concrete strategies.

For now, it remains unclear at what point the suggested multinational governing body will effectively begin operating, and the same is true for the appointed peacekeeping troops – or even the identity of its soldiers. On Tuesday, a US official said the US would not impose the composition of the international force on the Israeli government. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s government keeps to reject one alternative after another – as it did with the Ankara's proposal recently – what happens then? There is also the reverse question: who will establish whether the troops preferred by Israel are even prepared in the mission?

The question of the duration it will take to demilitarize the militant group is similarly ambiguous. “Our hope in the government is that the international security force is will at this point take charge in neutralizing the organization,” remarked Vance this week. “That’s may need a while.” Trump further highlighted the uncertainty, stating in an conversation recently that there is no “rigid” timeline for the group to demilitarize. So, theoretically, the unnamed participants of this still unformed international force could deploy to the territory while the organization's fighters continue to wield influence. Are they dealing with a administration or a militant faction? These are just a few of the concerns surfacing. Some might question what the verdict will be for everyday residents as things stand, with Hamas persisting to focus on its own adversaries and dissidents.

Recent events have yet again highlighted the gaps of Israeli reporting on the two sides of the Gazan border. Each publication seeks to scrutinize each potential perspective of Hamas’s breaches of the truce. And, usually, the fact that the organization has been stalling the repatriation of the bodies of deceased Israeli captives has monopolized the news.

Conversely, coverage of non-combatant fatalities in the region stemming from Israeli operations has received scant notice – or none. Consider the Israeli counter attacks after a recent Rafah incident, in which two troops were fatally wounded. While Gaza’s sources reported dozens of fatalities, Israeli media pundits questioned the “light answer,” which focused on just infrastructure.

This is not new. During the previous few days, the press agency charged Israel of violating the truce with the group multiple times since the ceasefire came into effect, causing the death of dozens of individuals and wounding another 143. The claim appeared unimportant to most Israeli reporting – it was merely missing. That included accounts that 11 members of a Palestinian household were fatally shot by Israeli forces last Friday.

The rescue organization said the family had been attempting to return to their home in the a Gaza City area of Gaza City when the vehicle they were in was attacked for reportedly passing the “demarcation line” that defines territories under Israeli military control. That boundary is invisible to the human eye and appears solely on plans and in authoritative papers – sometimes not available to average people in the area.

Even that occurrence hardly got a mention in Israeli media. One source referred to it in passing on its website, referencing an Israeli military representative who explained that after a suspect car was spotted, troops fired alerting fire towards it, “but the transport persisted to approach the soldiers in a way that caused an immediate threat to them. The soldiers engaged to eliminate the threat, in line with the truce.” No casualties were reported.

Amid such perspective, it is little wonder a lot of Israelis feel the group alone is to responsible for breaking the peace. That view risks fuelling calls for a stronger stance in the region.

Eventually – maybe sooner than expected – it will not be adequate for US envoys to act as caretakers, advising the Israeli government what to avoid. They will {have to|need