🔗 Share this article

Thhese times present a quite unusual phenomenon: the first-ever US procession of the overseers. Their qualifications differ in their expertise and characteristics, but they all possess the common objective – to prevent an Israeli violation, or even demolition, of Gaza’s unstable peace agreement. Since the hostilities ended, there have been scant occasions without at least one of Donald Trump’s envoys on the territory. Just this past week included the arrival of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, a senator and a political figure – all coming to execute their duties.

The Israeli government engages them fully. In just a few short period it launched a set of operations in Gaza after the deaths of a pair of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) personnel – leading, as reported, in many of local casualties. Several officials called for a restart of the fighting, and the Knesset passed a preliminary resolution to incorporate the West Bank. The US reaction was somewhere between “no” and “hell no.”

But in various respects, the American government appears more focused on maintaining the existing, unstable stage of the ceasefire than on progressing to the subsequent: the rebuilding of Gaza. When it comes to this, it looks the US may have aspirations but little specific plans.

At present, it remains uncertain when the planned international administrative entity will truly assume control, and the same goes for the designated peacekeeping troops – or even the identity of its personnel. On a recent day, Vance declared the US would not force the structure of the international force on Israel. But if the prime minister's government continues to reject one alternative after another – as it acted with the Ankara's suggestion lately – what occurs next? There is also the contrary point: which party will determine whether the troops supported by Israel are even prepared in the task?

The matter of the duration it will require to neutralize the militant group is just as ambiguous. “The aim in the government is that the international security force is going to at this point assume responsibility in disarming Hamas,” said Vance lately. “It’s may need some time.” Trump only reinforced the ambiguity, declaring in an interview on Sunday that there is no “hard” schedule for Hamas to disarm. So, hypothetically, the unnamed members of this not yet established global contingent could deploy to the territory while Hamas fighters continue to hold power. Are they confronting a administration or a militant faction? These represent only some of the issues arising. Some might ask what the outcome will be for ordinary Palestinians as things stand, with the group continuing to target its own adversaries and dissidents.

Recent incidents have afresh highlighted the blind spots of local reporting on both sides of the Gazan boundary. Every outlet attempts to analyze all conceivable perspective of the group's violations of the truce. And, usually, the fact that the organization has been stalling the return of the remains of slain Israeli hostages has taken over the news.

On the other hand, coverage of non-combatant deaths in the region stemming from Israeli strikes has obtained minimal notice – if at all. Take the Israeli response strikes in the wake of Sunday’s Rafah occurrence, in which a pair of soldiers were lost. While local authorities stated 44 fatalities, Israeli media pundits complained about the “light response,” which hit just installations.

That is nothing new. During the recent few days, the press agency accused Israel of breaking the peace with Hamas multiple occasions since the ceasefire was implemented, resulting in the loss of 38 Palestinians and injuring another 143. The claim appeared unimportant to most Israeli reporting – it was simply absent. That included reports that 11 members of a Palestinian family were fatally shot by Israeli forces a few days ago.

The civil defence agency reported the family had been seeking to return to their home in the a Gaza City area of Gaza City when the vehicle they were in was targeted for allegedly crossing the “boundary” that defines areas under Israeli army control. That boundary is not visible to the ordinary view and appears only on plans and in official documents – often not available to average residents in the area.

Even this incident scarcely received a note in Israeli news outlets. A major outlet mentioned it shortly on its digital site, citing an IDF official who said that after a suspicious vehicle was spotted, forces fired alerting fire towards it, “but the transport continued to approach the troops in a fashion that created an direct danger to them. The forces engaged to eliminate the threat, in compliance with the agreement.” Zero casualties were reported.

With this narrative, it is no surprise a lot of Israeli citizens believe the group alone is to blame for violating the ceasefire. This belief threatens fuelling appeals for a more aggressive stance in Gaza.

Sooner or later – possibly sooner than expected – it will no longer be sufficient for all the president’s men to act as kindergarten teachers, advising Israel what to avoid. They will {have to|need