🔗 Share this article

Thhese days showcase a quite unusual phenomenon: the first-ever US procession of the caretakers. They vary in their expertise and characteristics, but they all have the same objective – to avert an Israeli violation, or even demolition, of the delicate ceasefire. Since the war finished, there have been rare days without at least one of Donald Trump’s representatives on the territory. Just recently saw the arrival of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and a political figure – all appearing to carry out their duties.

Israel keeps them busy. In only a few short period it executed a set of operations in Gaza after the killings of a pair of Israeli military soldiers – leading, based on accounts, in dozens of Palestinian fatalities. Multiple leaders urged a resumption of the conflict, and the Knesset approved a early measure to annex the West Bank. The US response was somewhere ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in various respects, the Trump administration seems more intent on maintaining the current, unstable phase of the truce than on moving to the next: the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip. When it comes to that, it appears the US may have ambitions but little specific plans.

At present, it remains uncertain when the proposed international administrative entity will truly assume control, and the same applies to the proposed security force – or even the identity of its soldiers. On a recent day, a US official declared the US would not impose the membership of the international contingent on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s administration continues to dismiss one alternative after another – as it did with the Turkish suggestion this week – what happens then? There is also the opposite point: who will establish whether the forces preferred by the Israelis are even interested in the assignment?

The issue of the duration it will require to demilitarize the militant group is equally ambiguous. “The aim in the leadership is that the international security force is intends to at this point take charge in neutralizing Hamas,” remarked Vance this week. “That’s will require a while.” Trump further highlighted the ambiguity, stating in an conversation a few days ago that there is no “rigid” schedule for the group to lay down arms. So, theoretically, the unidentified participants of this yet-to-be-formed international force could enter Gaza while the organization's fighters continue to hold power. Are they dealing with a leadership or a militant faction? Among the many of the issues surfacing. Others might ask what the outcome will be for average residents under current conditions, with the group continuing to attack its own adversaries and opposition.

Latest events have yet again highlighted the omissions of local journalism on each side of the Gaza boundary. Every outlet attempts to scrutinize every possible perspective of the group's infractions of the truce. And, usually, the fact that the organization has been delaying the repatriation of the bodies of killed Israeli captives has dominated the news.

Conversely, reporting of civilian casualties in the region stemming from Israeli operations has garnered scant focus – if any. Take the Israeli response strikes following Sunday’s Rafah event, in which a pair of soldiers were fatally wounded. While local officials stated dozens of deaths, Israeli television analysts criticised the “moderate answer,” which hit solely infrastructure.

That is typical. Over the recent weekend, Gaza’s information bureau charged Israeli forces of breaking the peace with Hamas multiple occasions after the ceasefire began, causing the death of 38 individuals and harming another many more. The claim seemed unimportant to most Israeli news programmes – it was just ignored. This applied to accounts that 11 members of a Palestinian family were killed by Israeli troops last Friday.

Gaza’s civil defence agency said the individuals had been trying to go back to their dwelling in the a Gaza City neighbourhood of the city when the bus they were in was attacked for supposedly going over the “boundary” that demarcates areas under Israeli army authority. This boundary is not visible to the human eye and shows up solely on charts and in government documents – not always obtainable to ordinary residents in the region.

Even this incident barely received a note in Israeli journalism. Channel 13 News covered it briefly on its website, quoting an Israeli military spokesperson who said that after a questionable transport was spotted, forces fired cautionary rounds towards it, “but the vehicle persisted to advance on the troops in a fashion that caused an direct threat to them. The soldiers opened fire to remove the danger, in compliance with the ceasefire.” No fatalities were reported.

Amid such narrative, it is no surprise many Israelis feel Hamas alone is to blame for breaking the truce. That view threatens encouraging demands for a stronger approach in the region.

Sooner or later – possibly sooner than expected – it will not be adequate for all the president’s men to play caretakers, instructing the Israeli government what to refrain from. They will {have to|need