🔗 Share this article

Thhese times present a very unusual situation: the first-ever US parade of the overseers. Their qualifications differ in their expertise and attributes, but they all possess the common objective – to avert an Israeli breach, or even devastation, of the fragile peace agreement. Since the war ended, there have been few occasions without at least one of the former president's envoys on the territory. Only this past week featured the presence of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and a political figure – all coming to carry out their assignments.

Israel engages them fully. In only a few days it executed a wave of operations in the region after the loss of a pair of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers – leading, as reported, in many of local casualties. A number of leaders urged a resumption of the fighting, and the Knesset approved a initial resolution to take over the occupied territories. The US stance was somehow between “no” and “hell no.”

But in various respects, the Trump administration appears more focused on maintaining the existing, tense stage of the ceasefire than on advancing to the next: the rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip. Regarding that, it appears the United States may have aspirations but few specific proposals.

For now, it is uncertain when the proposed global governing body will truly begin operating, and the similar goes for the appointed military contingent – or even the composition of its soldiers. On Tuesday, Vance said the United States would not force the composition of the foreign force on the Israeli government. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s government persists to dismiss multiple options – as it did with the Turkish suggestion this week – what happens then? There is also the contrary question: which party will decide whether the forces preferred by the Israelis are even willing in the assignment?

The question of how long it will require to disarm the militant group is just as unclear. “The aim in the government is that the multinational troops is will at this point take charge in demilitarizing Hamas,” remarked Vance this week. “It’s may need a period.” The former president further highlighted the uncertainty, saying in an discussion a few days ago that there is no “hard” schedule for Hamas to demilitarize. So, theoretically, the unnamed participants of this not yet established international contingent could enter the territory while the organization's fighters continue to hold power. Are they confronting a administration or a militant faction? These represent only some of the concerns arising. Others might ask what the verdict will be for ordinary residents as things stand, with Hamas continuing to focus on its own political rivals and opposition.

Current events have afresh underscored the omissions of Israeli reporting on both sides of the Gaza boundary. Every outlet seeks to scrutinize each potential perspective of the group's breaches of the truce. And, usually, the situation that the organization has been delaying the return of the bodies of killed Israeli captives has monopolized the coverage.

Conversely, attention of non-combatant casualties in the region stemming from Israeli operations has received minimal focus – if any. Take the Israeli retaliatory strikes following a recent southern Gaza occurrence, in which two military personnel were killed. While Gaza’s authorities reported dozens of fatalities, Israeli media analysts complained about the “light response,” which hit solely facilities.

This is typical. During the recent few days, Gaza’s press agency accused Israeli forces of violating the peace with the group 47 occasions after the truce was implemented, resulting in the loss of dozens of individuals and wounding another many more. The claim was unimportant to most Israeli media outlets – it was merely absent. That included reports that eleven members of a local family were lost their lives by Israeli soldiers a few days ago.

Gaza’s emergency services stated the family had been seeking to return to their home in the a Gaza City area of the city when the bus they were in was attacked for reportedly crossing the “demarcation line” that marks zones under Israeli military control. This yellow line is not visible to the ordinary view and shows up only on charts and in government records – not always available to average residents in the area.

Yet this incident scarcely got a reference in Israeli news outlets. Channel 13 News mentioned it shortly on its online platform, quoting an IDF representative who explained that after a suspicious car was identified, forces fired warning shots towards it, “but the car kept to approach the troops in a manner that posed an direct danger to them. The forces shot to remove the threat, in line with the agreement.” No casualties were claimed.

Amid such framing, it is understandable numerous Israeli citizens believe the group exclusively is to blame for infringing the peace. This view threatens fuelling calls for a more aggressive strategy in Gaza.

At some point – maybe sooner rather than later – it will no longer be enough for US envoys to act as caretakers, advising Israel what to refrain from. They will {have to|need