🔗 Share this article

Thhese times showcase a very distinctive phenomenon: the pioneering US parade of the caretakers. They vary in their expertise and attributes, but they all share the common objective – to prevent an Israeli infringement, or even destruction, of the delicate peace agreement. Since the war concluded, there have been rare days without at least one of the former president's envoys on the scene. Only in the last few days saw the arrival of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and Marco Rubio – all coming to carry out their roles.

The Israeli government keeps them busy. In only a few short period it executed a wave of attacks in Gaza after the deaths of a pair of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops – leading, as reported, in scores of Palestinian casualties. Several ministers called for a restart of the war, and the Knesset enacted a initial resolution to incorporate the occupied territories. The American stance was somehow ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

However in more than one sense, the US leadership appears more focused on preserving the current, tense stage of the ceasefire than on moving to the subsequent: the rebuilding of the Gaza Strip. When it comes to that, it looks the US may have ambitions but little tangible proposals.

At present, it remains uncertain when the suggested multinational governing body will effectively take power, and the similar is true for the designated security force – or even the identity of its soldiers. On Tuesday, a US official stated the US would not impose the membership of the international force on the Israeli government. But if the prime minister's government continues to dismiss multiple options – as it acted with the Turkish offer this week – what occurs next? There is also the reverse point: which party will determine whether the troops preferred by Israel are even willing in the assignment?

The matter of the timeframe it will need to demilitarize Hamas is similarly vague. “Our hope in the leadership is that the international security force is intends to now assume responsibility in disarming Hamas,” said Vance recently. “That’s going to take a period.” The former president only reinforced the ambiguity, saying in an discussion on Sunday that there is no “rigid” schedule for the group to disarm. So, in theory, the unidentified members of this still unformed global force could deploy to the territory while the organization's fighters still remain in control. Are they facing a leadership or a insurgent group? These are just a few of the issues arising. Some might wonder what the result will be for ordinary civilians in the present situation, with the group carrying on to attack its own adversaries and opposition.

Latest incidents have once again emphasized the blind spots of local reporting on each side of the Gazan boundary. Every source strives to analyze every possible angle of Hamas’s violations of the truce. And, usually, the reality that the organization has been stalling the return of the bodies of killed Israeli captives has dominated the headlines.

Conversely, coverage of non-combatant fatalities in Gaza stemming from Israeli strikes has garnered minimal focus – if any. Consider the Israeli retaliatory attacks after a recent southern Gaza occurrence, in which two soldiers were killed. While local officials reported 44 deaths, Israeli television analysts questioned the “light answer,” which targeted only installations.

That is nothing new. During the previous weekend, Gaza’s information bureau accused Israeli forces of breaking the ceasefire with Hamas multiple occasions since the agreement came into effect, killing 38 Palestinians and harming an additional 143. The claim appeared insignificant to the majority of Israeli reporting – it was simply absent. Even reports that eleven members of a Palestinian household were killed by Israeli troops last Friday.

The rescue organization said the individuals had been trying to go back to their home in the a Gaza City district of the city when the bus they were in was targeted for allegedly going over the “demarcation line” that defines zones under Israeli military command. That boundary is unseen to the ordinary view and is visible just on maps and in official records – not always accessible to everyday individuals in the region.

Even this occurrence scarcely got a reference in Israeli news outlets. A major outlet mentioned it in passing on its website, citing an Israeli military official who said that after a suspicious transport was spotted, forces discharged cautionary rounds towards it, “but the transport continued to move toward the forces in a way that caused an direct threat to them. The forces engaged to eliminate the risk, in accordance with the truce.” Zero casualties were claimed.

With such narrative, it is understandable a lot of Israeli citizens believe Hamas alone is to responsible for violating the ceasefire. That perception risks fuelling calls for a stronger stance in Gaza.

At some point – possibly in the near future – it will not be sufficient for US envoys to take on the role of supervisors, advising the Israeli government what not to do. They will {have to|need