🔗 Share this article

These days showcase a very unusual phenomenon: the first-ever US parade of the caretakers. Their attributes range in their skills and attributes, but they all have the common objective – to avert an Israeli infringement, or even destruction, of Gaza’s delicate ceasefire. Since the conflict finished, there have been few occasions without at least one of the former president's representatives on the ground. Just this past week saw the likes of a senior advisor, Steve Witkoff, a senator and a political figure – all arriving to execute their assignments.

The Israeli government engages them fully. In only a few days it launched a wave of operations in the region after the deaths of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers – resulting, based on accounts, in many of Palestinian injuries. Multiple ministers urged a renewal of the conflict, and the Israeli parliament approved a preliminary resolution to annex the West Bank. The American stance was somehow between “no” and “hell no.”

But in more than one sense, the US leadership appears more intent on upholding the existing, unstable phase of the peace than on advancing to the next: the rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip. Regarding that, it looks the US may have ambitions but no concrete plans.

For now, it remains unknown at what point the planned international governing body will effectively assume control, and the similar is true for the designated security force – or even the composition of its soldiers. On a recent day, Vance declared the US would not impose the membership of the international unit on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s government continues to dismiss multiple options – as it acted with the Ankara's proposal lately – what follows? There is also the reverse point: who will decide whether the forces preferred by the Israelis are even willing in the assignment?

The matter of how long it will need to neutralize the militant group is equally vague. “Our hope in the leadership is that the global peacekeeping unit is will now take charge in demilitarizing the organization,” said Vance lately. “That’s may need some time.” The former president only highlighted the uncertainty, stating in an discussion on Sunday that there is no “fixed” timeline for Hamas to disarm. So, in theory, the unnamed elements of this yet-to-be-formed international force could deploy to Gaza while the organization's fighters still wield influence. Would they be dealing with a administration or a guerrilla movement? These represent only some of the questions arising. Others might question what the result will be for ordinary residents as things stand, with the group persisting to target its own political rivals and critics.

Recent events have once again underscored the omissions of Israeli reporting on the two sides of the Gazan boundary. Every outlet strives to analyze every possible angle of the group's infractions of the ceasefire. And, typically, the situation that Hamas has been delaying the repatriation of the remains of killed Israeli captives has dominated the headlines.

On the other hand, reporting of non-combatant fatalities in the region stemming from Israeli operations has obtained scant attention – if any. Take the Israeli counter attacks following Sunday’s Rafah occurrence, in which a pair of soldiers were fatally wounded. While local sources stated 44 fatalities, Israeli media pundits complained about the “limited answer,” which focused on just facilities.

This is nothing new. Over the past few days, the press agency alleged Israeli forces of violating the peace with Hamas 47 times after the ceasefire was implemented, causing the death of 38 individuals and injuring another 143. The assertion seemed irrelevant to the majority of Israeli reporting – it was merely missing. This applied to reports that eleven individuals of a Palestinian household were killed by Israeli forces recently.

The civil defence agency stated the group had been attempting to go back to their dwelling in the a Gaza City area of Gaza City when the bus they were in was targeted for allegedly crossing the “boundary” that demarcates territories under Israeli military control. That boundary is not visible to the naked eye and shows up only on maps and in government documents – not always available to everyday individuals in the area.

Yet this incident scarcely received a note in Israeli news outlets. A major outlet referred to it in passing on its digital site, referencing an IDF official who explained that after a suspicious transport was spotted, soldiers fired alerting fire towards it, “but the transport persisted to advance on the forces in a fashion that created an direct danger to them. The forces engaged to remove the risk, in accordance with the truce.” No casualties were reported.

Given such narrative, it is no surprise numerous Israelis think Hamas exclusively is to at fault for breaking the ceasefire. This belief threatens encouraging demands for a tougher approach in Gaza.

Eventually – perhaps sooner rather than later – it will no longer be adequate for all the president’s men to take on the role of caretakers, advising Israel what to avoid. They will {have to|need