🔗 Share this article

These days exhibit a quite unique situation: the first-ever US march of the babysitters. Their attributes range in their skills and traits, but they all share the same mission – to stop an Israeli infringement, or even devastation, of Gaza’s unstable truce. After the conflict concluded, there have been scant occasions without at least one of the former president's envoys on the scene. Only recently featured the likes of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, a senator and a political figure – all coming to perform their duties.

The Israeli government engages them fully. In just a few days it executed a series of attacks in Gaza after the killings of a pair of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) personnel – resulting, according to reports, in scores of Palestinian casualties. A number of leaders urged a restart of the fighting, and the Knesset enacted a preliminary resolution to take over the occupied territories. The American reaction was somehow between “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in more than one sense, the American government appears more intent on preserving the present, tense period of the truce than on progressing to the subsequent: the reconstruction of Gaza. Regarding that, it seems the United States may have goals but few specific proposals.

For now, it is unknown at what point the suggested multinational governing body will effectively begin operating, and the same applies to the proposed military contingent – or even the makeup of its soldiers. On Tuesday, a US official declared the United States would not force the membership of the international contingent on the Israeli government. But if the prime minister's government persists to reject various proposals – as it acted with the Ankara's offer this week – what occurs next? There is also the opposite issue: who will establish whether the units favoured by Israel are even prepared in the task?

The issue of the timeframe it will require to neutralize the militant group is just as ambiguous. “The aim in the government is that the multinational troops is intends to now take charge in demilitarizing the organization,” remarked Vance this week. “That’s will require a while.” Trump only highlighted the uncertainty, declaring in an conversation on Sunday that there is no “fixed” deadline for the group to disarm. So, hypothetically, the unnamed participants of this not yet established international force could arrive in Gaza while the organization's fighters still wield influence. Are they dealing with a administration or a guerrilla movement? These are just a few of the concerns emerging. Some might question what the verdict will be for ordinary civilians as things stand, with Hamas continuing to focus on its own political rivals and critics.

Latest events have yet again highlighted the blind spots of Israeli reporting on both sides of the Gazan boundary. Every outlet strives to scrutinize every possible angle of the group's violations of the ceasefire. And, usually, the reality that Hamas has been delaying the return of the bodies of deceased Israeli captives has taken over the news.

By contrast, attention of non-combatant casualties in Gaza caused by Israeli attacks has garnered little attention – if at all. Consider the Israeli response attacks in the wake of a recent southern Gaza incident, in which a pair of military personnel were killed. While Gaza’s officials stated dozens of deaths, Israeli television analysts questioned the “limited answer,” which hit solely installations.

That is typical. During the previous few days, Gaza’s press agency accused Israeli forces of breaking the peace with Hamas 47 times after the ceasefire came into effect, killing 38 individuals and injuring another 143. The claim seemed insignificant to most Israeli reporting – it was simply ignored. That included reports that 11 members of a local household were fatally shot by Israeli forces a few days ago.

Gaza’s rescue organization said the family had been trying to return to their residence in the Zeitoun neighbourhood of Gaza City when the transport they were in was fired upon for reportedly going over the “yellow line” that defines zones under Israeli army command. That boundary is invisible to the human eye and shows up solely on charts and in government documents – sometimes not accessible to ordinary residents in the territory.

Even that event barely got a mention in Israeli news outlets. A major outlet mentioned it briefly on its website, referencing an Israeli military spokesperson who explained that after a questionable vehicle was spotted, soldiers shot cautionary rounds towards it, “but the car continued to move toward the forces in a fashion that posed an imminent danger to them. The forces opened fire to remove the danger, in compliance with the agreement.” No casualties were reported.

With this framing, it is understandable numerous Israeli citizens think the group alone is to responsible for violating the ceasefire. This perception risks prompting appeals for a tougher approach in Gaza.

At some point – possibly sooner rather than later – it will not be sufficient for American representatives to play caretakers, telling Israel what not to do. They will {have to|need