🔗 Share this article

These times present a quite distinctive phenomenon: the pioneering US parade of the overseers. They vary in their skills and characteristics, but they all share the same objective – to avert an Israeli breach, or even devastation, of the delicate truce. Since the hostilities finished, there have been scant occasions without at least one of Donald Trump’s representatives on the scene. Only in the last few days featured the presence of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all arriving to perform their assignments.

Israel engages them fully. In only a few days it launched a set of strikes in Gaza after the killings of two Israeli military troops – resulting, based on accounts, in scores of Palestinian fatalities. A number of ministers demanded a resumption of the fighting, and the Israeli parliament approved a initial decision to annex the occupied territories. The US stance was somehow ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

But in several ways, the US leadership appears more intent on upholding the present, tense phase of the peace than on advancing to the next: the reconstruction of Gaza. Concerning this, it seems the US may have aspirations but little specific plans.

For now, it remains unknown when the proposed multinational governing body will effectively begin operating, and the similar goes for the appointed peacekeeping troops – or even the composition of its members. On a recent day, Vance declared the US would not force the membership of the international force on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s government keeps to dismiss one alternative after another – as it acted with the Turkish suggestion lately – what occurs next? There is also the contrary point: who will decide whether the troops favoured by Israel are even interested in the mission?

The issue of how long it will take to demilitarize Hamas is just as ambiguous. “The aim in the government is that the global peacekeeping unit is going to now take the lead in demilitarizing the organization,” said the official lately. “That’s going to take a while.” The former president further emphasized the ambiguity, stating in an discussion on Sunday that there is no “fixed” schedule for Hamas to lay down arms. So, in theory, the unnamed elements of this not yet established global force could arrive in the territory while the organization's militants continue to hold power. Would they be confronting a governing body or a guerrilla movement? These are just a few of the issues arising. Some might wonder what the outcome will be for average residents as things stand, with Hamas persisting to attack its own adversaries and dissidents.

Latest incidents have yet again underscored the omissions of local journalism on the two sides of the Gazan border. Every publication attempts to scrutinize each potential angle of Hamas’s infractions of the truce. And, typically, the fact that Hamas has been hindering the repatriation of the bodies of deceased Israeli hostages has dominated the news.

On the other hand, reporting of civilian fatalities in the region stemming from Israeli attacks has obtained little focus – if any. Consider the Israeli retaliatory strikes after a recent Rafah incident, in which two military personnel were lost. While Gaza’s officials stated 44 casualties, Israeli television analysts complained about the “limited response,” which focused on only installations.

This is nothing new. Over the past few days, Gaza’s media office accused Israel of infringing the peace with Hamas multiple occasions after the agreement came into effect, killing dozens of Palestinians and wounding an additional many more. The allegation appeared unimportant to the majority of Israeli reporting – it was merely missing. That included information that eleven individuals of a Palestinian family were fatally shot by Israeli troops recently.

Gaza’s emergency services stated the group had been seeking to return to their home in the a Gaza City area of Gaza City when the transport they were in was targeted for reportedly passing the “yellow line” that marks zones under Israeli military control. That boundary is invisible to the ordinary view and appears only on plans and in government documents – often not obtainable to everyday residents in the region.

Yet this incident barely rated a note in Israeli media. Channel 13 News covered it briefly on its website, citing an IDF official who explained that after a questionable vehicle was identified, soldiers shot cautionary rounds towards it, “but the car persisted to move toward the troops in a fashion that created an imminent threat to them. The forces opened fire to eliminate the threat, in accordance with the agreement.” Zero injuries were reported.

With this perspective, it is understandable numerous Israeli citizens believe Hamas alone is to responsible for breaking the ceasefire. This view risks fuelling calls for a more aggressive strategy in the region.

Eventually – possibly sooner rather than later – it will no longer be adequate for US envoys to take on the role of caretakers, instructing the Israeli government what to avoid. They will {have to|need