🔗 Share this article

Thhese times exhibit a quite unusual situation: the pioneering US march of the babysitters. Their qualifications differ in their qualifications and traits, but they all have the common objective – to prevent an Israeli breach, or even destruction, of Gaza’s delicate ceasefire. After the war finished, there have been few days without at least one of Donald Trump’s representatives on the ground. Only this past week featured the presence of a senior advisor, a businessman, a senator and Marco Rubio – all arriving to carry out their roles.

The Israeli government engages them fully. In just a few days it launched a wave of attacks in the region after the loss of two Israeli military personnel – resulting, based on accounts, in dozens of local casualties. Multiple officials demanded a renewal of the war, and the Israeli parliament passed a initial resolution to incorporate the occupied territories. The US response was somehow between “no” and “hell no.”

However in various respects, the US leadership seems more concentrated on maintaining the current, unstable period of the truce than on progressing to the following: the reconstruction of Gaza. Regarding this, it seems the United States may have aspirations but little specific proposals.

Currently, it remains uncertain at what point the proposed multinational oversight committee will actually take power, and the similar goes for the appointed security force – or even the composition of its personnel. On a recent day, a US official declared the US would not force the composition of the foreign contingent on the Israeli government. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s government continues to reject various proposals – as it acted with the Turkish offer lately – what happens then? There is also the opposite question: who will determine whether the troops supported by Israel are even prepared in the assignment?

The issue of the duration it will take to disarm the militant group is just as vague. “The aim in the administration is that the multinational troops is will now take the lead in neutralizing Hamas,” remarked Vance recently. “It’s going to take some time.” The former president further emphasized the lack of clarity, declaring in an interview recently that there is no “hard” timeline for the group to lay down arms. So, in theory, the unknown elements of this not yet established global contingent could enter Gaza while the organization's militants continue to hold power. Would they be facing a leadership or a guerrilla movement? These represent only some of the issues emerging. Some might ask what the outcome will be for average Palestinians in the present situation, with Hamas carrying on to attack its own adversaries and opposition.

Latest developments have yet again underscored the blind spots of Israeli reporting on each side of the Gaza frontier. Each outlet seeks to examine all conceivable angle of Hamas’s violations of the truce. And, usually, the reality that Hamas has been stalling the return of the bodies of slain Israeli hostages has monopolized the coverage.

Conversely, reporting of civilian fatalities in the region resulting from Israeli operations has received minimal attention – if at all. Take the Israeli counter attacks in the wake of Sunday’s southern Gaza incident, in which two military personnel were fatally wounded. While Gaza’s authorities claimed dozens of deaths, Israeli television pundits criticised the “light reaction,” which focused on solely facilities.

This is typical. Over the past weekend, the press agency alleged Israeli forces of violating the ceasefire with the group multiple times since the truce was implemented, killing dozens of Palestinians and injuring an additional 143. The claim seemed irrelevant to the majority of Israeli media outlets – it was merely ignored. This applied to reports that 11 individuals of a Palestinian household were fatally shot by Israeli forces a few days ago.

Gaza’s civil defence agency said the group had been attempting to return to their residence in the Zeitoun district of the city when the vehicle they were in was attacked for reportedly crossing the “demarcation line” that defines zones under Israeli military authority. This limit is invisible to the human eye and shows up just on maps and in official documents – not always obtainable to average individuals in the area.

Yet that occurrence scarcely got a reference in Israeli journalism. One source referred to it shortly on its online platform, referencing an Israeli military spokesperson who explained that after a suspicious vehicle was detected, forces discharged alerting fire towards it, “but the vehicle persisted to approach the soldiers in a way that posed an imminent danger to them. The soldiers shot to neutralize the risk, in accordance with the agreement.” No fatalities were stated.

Amid this narrative, it is no surprise a lot of Israelis believe the group alone is to blame for violating the peace. That view risks fuelling appeals for a stronger stance in Gaza.

Sooner or later – perhaps in the near future – it will no longer be enough for American representatives to play caretakers, instructing the Israeli government what to refrain from. They will {have to|need