🔗 Share this article

These times present a quite unique occurrence: the first-ever US march of the caretakers. Their qualifications differ in their expertise and traits, but they all possess the common mission – to avert an Israeli violation, or even destruction, of Gaza’s unstable ceasefire. Since the hostilities ended, there have been rare occasions without at least one of the former president's delegates on the territory. Only in the last few days included the presence of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and a political figure – all appearing to carry out their duties.

Israel occupies their time. In just a few days it executed a set of operations in Gaza after the killings of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) personnel – resulting, based on accounts, in many of local fatalities. Several officials called for a restart of the conflict, and the Knesset passed a preliminary decision to incorporate the occupied territories. The American stance was somehow ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in various respects, the Trump administration seems more intent on maintaining the current, unstable period of the peace than on moving to the following: the rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip. Concerning this, it appears the US may have goals but little concrete proposals.

For now, it is unclear at what point the planned global oversight committee will truly assume control, and the same goes for the appointed military contingent – or even the makeup of its members. On a recent day, Vance stated the US would not force the structure of the international force on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s government continues to refuse various proposals – as it acted with the Ankara's proposal recently – what follows? There is also the contrary issue: who will establish whether the forces favoured by the Israelis are even interested in the task?

The question of the duration it will need to demilitarize Hamas is equally unclear. “The expectation in the administration is that the multinational troops is will at this point take the lead in demilitarizing Hamas,” remarked Vance this week. “That’s going to take a while.” Trump further emphasized the uncertainty, saying in an conversation on Sunday that there is no “fixed” timeline for the group to disarm. So, hypothetically, the unknown members of this not yet established international force could deploy to Gaza while Hamas members continue to remain in control. Would they be dealing with a governing body or a insurgent group? These represent only some of the issues arising. Some might wonder what the outcome will be for ordinary residents in the present situation, with Hamas continuing to attack its own political rivals and critics.

Latest developments have once again underscored the omissions of local journalism on both sides of the Gaza boundary. Each publication seeks to scrutinize every possible perspective of the group's infractions of the ceasefire. And, in general, the fact that the organization has been stalling the repatriation of the bodies of killed Israeli captives has taken over the news.

On the other hand, reporting of civilian deaths in the region stemming from Israeli attacks has received scant notice – if at all. Consider the Israeli response actions after Sunday’s Rafah event, in which a pair of military personnel were killed. While local authorities reported 44 casualties, Israeli news pundits criticised the “moderate reaction,” which focused on only installations.

That is not new. Over the previous weekend, the information bureau alleged Israeli forces of breaking the ceasefire with the group multiple occasions after the truce began, resulting in the loss of 38 individuals and harming another 143. The assertion appeared unimportant to the majority of Israeli reporting – it was simply ignored. This applied to reports that 11 individuals of a Palestinian family were fatally shot by Israeli forces recently.

The emergency services said the group had been trying to return to their residence in the a Gaza City district of Gaza City when the transport they were in was targeted for reportedly passing the “demarcation line” that demarcates zones under Israeli military control. This boundary is unseen to the naked eye and is visible solely on maps and in government documents – sometimes not accessible to ordinary individuals in the territory.

Yet that event barely received a reference in Israeli media. A major outlet mentioned it briefly on its digital site, citing an IDF representative who stated that after a suspicious transport was spotted, forces fired alerting fire towards it, “but the car persisted to approach the forces in a manner that created an immediate risk to them. The troops opened fire to remove the danger, in line with the ceasefire.” No casualties were stated.

With such narrative, it is little wonder numerous Israeli citizens believe the group solely is to at fault for infringing the ceasefire. This view risks prompting appeals for a stronger strategy in the region.

Eventually – perhaps sooner than expected – it will not be sufficient for all the president’s men to take on the role of kindergarten teachers, advising the Israeli government what to refrain from. They will {have to|need