🔗 Share this article

These times showcase a very unusual phenomenon: the pioneering US parade of the caretakers. Their qualifications differ in their skills and attributes, but they all share the same objective – to stop an Israeli infringement, or even devastation, of the unstable truce. After the war concluded, there have been few occasions without at least one of the former president's envoys on the ground. Only recently saw the likes of Jared Kushner, a businessman, a senator and a political figure – all appearing to execute their assignments.

The Israeli government occupies their time. In just a few days it initiated a wave of operations in Gaza after the killings of a pair of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers – leading, based on accounts, in many of Palestinian casualties. Several leaders urged a renewal of the fighting, and the Knesset approved a preliminary measure to take over the West Bank. The US response was somehow between “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in more than one sense, the American government appears more intent on upholding the current, tense stage of the peace than on advancing to the subsequent: the rehabilitation of Gaza. Regarding that, it looks the US may have ambitions but no specific strategies.

At present, it remains uncertain at what point the proposed multinational oversight committee will truly assume control, and the same applies to the appointed peacekeeping troops – or even the makeup of its soldiers. On a recent day, a US official stated the United States would not dictate the composition of the international force on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s administration keeps to refuse multiple options – as it did with the Turkish offer recently – what happens then? There is also the contrary question: which party will decide whether the units favoured by Israel are even prepared in the task?

The matter of the duration it will require to neutralize the militant group is equally vague. “The expectation in the government is that the multinational troops is going to at this point take the lead in demilitarizing the organization,” remarked Vance lately. “It’s may need a while.” Trump further highlighted the ambiguity, saying in an interview a few days ago that there is no “rigid” timeline for Hamas to lay down arms. So, in theory, the unnamed participants of this yet-to-be-formed international contingent could enter the territory while the organization's fighters continue to hold power. Are they dealing with a administration or a guerrilla movement? These represent only some of the concerns arising. Others might ask what the verdict will be for ordinary Palestinians as things stand, with the group persisting to focus on its own political rivals and dissidents.

Recent events have yet again highlighted the blind spots of Israeli media coverage on the two sides of the Gazan frontier. Each publication seeks to analyze every possible angle of Hamas’s infractions of the peace. And, in general, the reality that Hamas has been hindering the repatriation of the bodies of slain Israeli hostages has dominated the headlines.

Conversely, reporting of non-combatant fatalities in Gaza resulting from Israeli strikes has garnered little focus – or none. Take the Israeli counter actions following Sunday’s Rafah occurrence, in which a pair of troops were killed. While local officials stated dozens of casualties, Israeli news analysts criticised the “light answer,” which focused on only installations.

That is not new. During the recent few days, the press agency alleged Israel of violating the ceasefire with Hamas 47 times since the truce began, killing 38 individuals and harming an additional 143. The claim appeared insignificant to most Israeli reporting – it was simply missing. This applied to information that 11 members of a Palestinian family were killed by Israeli soldiers last Friday.

Gaza’s civil defence agency said the individuals had been attempting to go back to their home in the a Gaza City neighbourhood of Gaza City when the transport they were in was targeted for allegedly going over the “demarcation line” that defines territories under Israeli military authority. This yellow line is unseen to the ordinary view and is visible just on maps and in official papers – not always available to ordinary individuals in the territory.

Even this incident scarcely rated a mention in Israeli journalism. Channel 13 News referred to it briefly on its digital site, referencing an Israeli military spokesperson who said that after a suspect transport was detected, troops shot cautionary rounds towards it, “but the vehicle persisted to advance on the troops in a fashion that posed an imminent danger to them. The troops shot to eliminate the risk, in compliance with the ceasefire.” Zero injuries were claimed.

Amid such framing, it is understandable numerous Israeli citizens feel the group solely is to responsible for infringing the peace. This view could lead to fuelling appeals for a more aggressive stance in Gaza.

Eventually – possibly sooner rather than later – it will not be enough for US envoys to take on the role of caretakers, telling the Israeli government what to avoid. They will {have to|need