🔗 Share this article

These days exhibit a very distinctive phenomenon: the inaugural US march of the babysitters. Their qualifications differ in their expertise and attributes, but they all possess the same objective – to avert an Israeli infringement, or even devastation, of the fragile ceasefire. After the conflict concluded, there have been scant occasions without at least one of the former president's representatives on the ground. Just this past week featured the arrival of a senior advisor, a businessman, JD Vance and a political figure – all arriving to carry out their assignments.

The Israeli government keeps them busy. In just a few short period it initiated a series of operations in Gaza after the killings of a pair of Israeli military troops – leading, based on accounts, in many of Palestinian casualties. A number of ministers demanded a resumption of the conflict, and the Israeli parliament passed a initial measure to incorporate the occupied territories. The US reaction was somewhere between “no” and “hell no.”

However in several ways, the Trump administration seems more focused on upholding the current, uneasy phase of the truce than on moving to the subsequent: the rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip. Regarding this, it appears the US may have ambitions but few specific proposals.

For now, it is unknown when the proposed multinational governing body will actually assume control, and the same applies to the proposed peacekeeping troops – or even the makeup of its personnel. On Tuesday, a US official declared the US would not force the structure of the international unit on the Israeli government. But if the prime minister's cabinet persists to reject multiple options – as it acted with the Ankara's suggestion recently – what occurs next? There is also the opposite issue: which party will decide whether the forces preferred by Israel are even prepared in the mission?

The question of how long it will require to neutralize the militant group is similarly vague. “Our hope in the leadership is that the multinational troops is will at this point take the lead in neutralizing Hamas,” said the official lately. “That’s will require a period.” The former president further highlighted the ambiguity, declaring in an interview a few days ago that there is no “rigid” deadline for Hamas to disarm. So, in theory, the unnamed members of this still unformed global force could arrive in the territory while Hamas members continue to hold power. Are they facing a leadership or a guerrilla movement? These represent only some of the issues surfacing. Some might ask what the verdict will be for ordinary civilians under current conditions, with the group carrying on to attack its own political rivals and opposition.

Current events have yet again underscored the gaps of Israeli journalism on the two sides of the Gaza border. Every outlet attempts to examine all conceivable angle of the group's breaches of the truce. And, typically, the situation that Hamas has been delaying the repatriation of the remains of killed Israeli hostages has taken over the news.

Conversely, reporting of civilian deaths in the region stemming from Israeli operations has garnered minimal focus – if at all. Take the Israeli counter attacks after a recent Rafah occurrence, in which two troops were fatally wounded. While Gaza’s authorities stated dozens of fatalities, Israeli news analysts criticised the “moderate response,” which focused on only facilities.

This is not new. During the recent few days, Gaza’s information bureau accused Israel of violating the truce with the group 47 occasions after the ceasefire was implemented, resulting in the loss of dozens of Palestinians and harming an additional many more. The claim appeared unimportant to most Israeli reporting – it was simply missing. This applied to accounts that eleven members of a local household were fatally shot by Israeli soldiers recently.

Gaza’s emergency services stated the group had been seeking to go back to their residence in the Zeitoun area of Gaza City when the vehicle they were in was attacked for allegedly going over the “boundary” that demarcates zones under Israeli army control. This boundary is invisible to the ordinary view and shows up only on plans and in government documents – sometimes not available to ordinary people in the territory.

Yet that incident barely rated a note in Israeli news outlets. Channel 13 News referred to it in passing on its digital site, referencing an Israeli military spokesperson who stated that after a questionable vehicle was spotted, soldiers discharged cautionary rounds towards it, “but the vehicle persisted to approach the troops in a way that created an immediate risk to them. The troops opened fire to neutralize the risk, in line with the truce.” Zero casualties were claimed.

Given this perspective, it is little wonder many Israeli citizens feel Hamas alone is to responsible for infringing the peace. This view threatens prompting appeals for a more aggressive approach in Gaza.

Eventually – perhaps sooner than expected – it will no longer be enough for all the president’s men to take on the role of kindergarten teachers, telling Israel what not to do. They will {have to|need