🔗 Share this article

These times present a quite distinctive situation: the pioneering US march of the caretakers. Their qualifications differ in their qualifications and traits, but they all share the identical goal – to stop an Israeli infringement, or even demolition, of the unstable ceasefire. Since the war finished, there have been rare occasions without at least one of Donald Trump’s representatives on the territory. Only in the last few days featured the presence of a senior advisor, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all appearing to perform their duties.

The Israeli government occupies their time. In only a few days it launched a set of strikes in Gaza after the deaths of a pair of Israeli military troops – resulting, according to reports, in scores of Palestinian injuries. Several leaders called for a resumption of the fighting, and the Knesset passed a preliminary resolution to take over the West Bank. The American stance was somewhere ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

However in more than one sense, the Trump administration appears more intent on upholding the present, uneasy stage of the truce than on progressing to the next: the reconstruction of Gaza. Concerning this, it looks the US may have ambitions but little specific proposals.

For now, it remains uncertain when the proposed multinational governing body will truly begin operating, and the same applies to the appointed peacekeeping troops – or even the identity of its personnel. On a recent day, a US official declared the United States would not force the membership of the international contingent on Israel. But if the prime minister's cabinet keeps to refuse one alternative after another – as it acted with the Ankara's proposal this week – what happens then? There is also the opposite point: who will determine whether the troops preferred by Israel are even prepared in the assignment?

The issue of the timeframe it will need to demilitarize Hamas is equally ambiguous. “The expectation in the government is that the multinational troops is will at this point assume responsibility in neutralizing the organization,” said Vance this week. “It’s may need some time.” Trump further reinforced the uncertainty, stating in an discussion a few days ago that there is no “fixed” timeline for the group to disarm. So, hypothetically, the unknown elements of this yet-to-be-formed global force could arrive in the territory while Hamas militants continue to wield influence. Would they be confronting a leadership or a insurgent group? These represent only some of the issues surfacing. Others might wonder what the verdict will be for everyday civilians in the present situation, with the group continuing to attack its own opponents and critics.

Recent developments have afresh emphasized the blind spots of local journalism on the two sides of the Gazan boundary. Each publication seeks to scrutinize every possible angle of the group's violations of the peace. And, typically, the fact that Hamas has been hindering the return of the bodies of slain Israeli captives has taken over the coverage.

On the other hand, reporting of non-combatant casualties in the region stemming from Israeli operations has received scant attention – if any. Consider the Israeli counter actions in the wake of a recent Rafah occurrence, in which two soldiers were killed. While local authorities claimed dozens of deaths, Israeli media pundits criticised the “limited reaction,” which targeted solely installations.

That is typical. During the previous weekend, the media office charged Israel of breaking the truce with Hamas 47 times after the ceasefire began, killing dozens of Palestinians and harming another 143. The assertion appeared irrelevant to most Israeli news programmes – it was merely absent. This applied to information that eleven individuals of a local family were lost their lives by Israeli troops last Friday.

The civil defence agency said the family had been trying to return to their home in the Zeitoun district of the city when the bus they were in was attacked for allegedly crossing the “demarcation line” that marks areas under Israeli military control. This yellow line is unseen to the ordinary view and is visible just on plans and in government papers – often not accessible to everyday individuals in the territory.

Yet this event barely got a reference in Israeli media. One source referred to it shortly on its online platform, quoting an Israeli military official who explained that after a suspect vehicle was identified, troops fired warning shots towards it, “but the car kept to approach the troops in a fashion that posed an imminent threat to them. The forces engaged to eliminate the risk, in accordance with the truce.” No injuries were stated.

With such narrative, it is no surprise a lot of Israeli citizens believe Hamas exclusively is to at fault for infringing the truce. This belief risks encouraging demands for a stronger strategy in the region.

Eventually – possibly sooner than expected – it will no longer be sufficient for all the president’s men to take on the role of caretakers, instructing Israel what to refrain from. They will {have to|need