🔗 Share this article

These times present a quite distinctive phenomenon: the inaugural US procession of the overseers. They vary in their qualifications and characteristics, but they all possess the identical objective – to prevent an Israeli infringement, or even demolition, of the fragile peace agreement. Since the hostilities concluded, there have been scant days without at least one of the former president's representatives on the ground. Only in the last few days saw the likes of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, a senator and Marco Rubio – all arriving to execute their assignments.

Israel keeps them busy. In only a few short period it executed a series of attacks in the region after the loss of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops – leading, as reported, in dozens of Palestinian injuries. Several leaders demanded a resumption of the conflict, and the Knesset approved a early resolution to take over the West Bank. The US stance was somehow ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in several ways, the US leadership seems more intent on maintaining the existing, tense phase of the truce than on advancing to the next: the rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip. When it comes to that, it seems the US may have ambitions but little concrete strategies.

Currently, it is unclear when the suggested international administrative entity will truly assume control, and the same applies to the proposed security force – or even the makeup of its members. On a recent day, a US official declared the US would not impose the composition of the international contingent on the Israeli government. But if the prime minister's government persists to dismiss multiple options – as it acted with the Turkish suggestion recently – what follows? There is also the opposite issue: which party will decide whether the forces favoured by the Israelis are even interested in the mission?

The matter of how long it will need to disarm the militant group is equally ambiguous. “The aim in the government is that the international security force is intends to at this point take charge in demilitarizing Hamas,” remarked Vance lately. “It’s may need a period.” Trump only highlighted the uncertainty, stating in an interview a few days ago that there is no “fixed” deadline for the group to disarm. So, in theory, the unidentified members of this still unformed global force could arrive in the territory while Hamas members continue to wield influence. Would they be dealing with a leadership or a guerrilla movement? These are just a few of the questions surfacing. Some might wonder what the verdict will be for average Palestinians under current conditions, with the group continuing to focus on its own opponents and opposition.

Current incidents have yet again emphasized the omissions of local journalism on both sides of the Gaza border. Every source attempts to scrutinize all conceivable aspect of Hamas’s infractions of the peace. And, usually, the reality that the organization has been delaying the return of the remains of slain Israeli captives has monopolized the headlines.

On the other hand, attention of non-combatant deaths in Gaza stemming from Israeli attacks has obtained little focus – if at all. Take the Israeli counter actions following a recent Rafah event, in which a pair of troops were lost. While local sources reported 44 fatalities, Israeli television commentators complained about the “limited response,” which hit solely installations.

That is nothing new. Over the recent few days, Gaza’s press agency alleged Israel of breaking the peace with the group multiple times since the ceasefire began, killing 38 individuals and injuring an additional 143. The assertion seemed unimportant to most Israeli reporting – it was merely absent. That included information that 11 members of a Palestinian family were fatally shot by Israeli forces last Friday.

Gaza’s civil defence agency stated the family had been seeking to return to their dwelling in the Zeitoun district of the city when the transport they were in was fired upon for reportedly crossing the “boundary” that demarcates areas under Israeli military command. This yellow line is invisible to the human eye and appears solely on charts and in official records – not always available to average individuals in the territory.

Even that event barely rated a reference in Israeli journalism. Channel 13 News referred to it in passing on its website, citing an Israeli military official who said that after a suspect car was spotted, soldiers fired alerting fire towards it, “but the vehicle continued to approach the troops in a manner that created an imminent risk to them. The soldiers opened fire to remove the danger, in compliance with the ceasefire.” Zero fatalities were stated.

With such narrative, it is understandable numerous Israeli citizens think the group alone is to at fault for breaking the truce. That view risks encouraging calls for a tougher strategy in the region.

Eventually – perhaps sooner than expected – it will no longer be sufficient for all the president’s men to take on the role of supervisors, advising the Israeli government what to refrain from. They will {have to|need