🔗 Share this article

These days exhibit a quite distinctive occurrence: the first-ever US parade of the overseers. Their qualifications differ in their expertise and traits, but they all share the common goal – to prevent an Israeli violation, or even destruction, of the fragile truce. Since the hostilities ended, there have been few days without at least one of Donald Trump’s representatives on the scene. Just recently featured the presence of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, a senator and Marco Rubio – all appearing to perform their roles.

Israel keeps them busy. In just a few short period it initiated a series of attacks in Gaza after the killings of a pair of Israeli military personnel – resulting, based on accounts, in scores of local casualties. A number of ministers urged a renewal of the fighting, and the Israeli parliament passed a preliminary resolution to annex the occupied territories. The American stance was somewhere ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

However in various respects, the American government seems more concentrated on maintaining the present, uneasy period of the truce than on advancing to the next: the rehabilitation of Gaza. Regarding this, it seems the United States may have ambitions but no tangible proposals.

At present, it remains unknown when the suggested multinational oversight committee will truly assume control, and the identical applies to the appointed peacekeeping troops – or even the identity of its members. On a recent day, Vance declared the United States would not force the composition of the international force on the Israeli government. But if the prime minister's administration continues to reject multiple options – as it did with the Ankara's proposal lately – what happens then? There is also the reverse issue: which party will determine whether the troops favoured by Israel are even prepared in the task?

The issue of the duration it will need to demilitarize Hamas is just as ambiguous. “The expectation in the administration is that the global peacekeeping unit is intends to at this point take the lead in neutralizing the organization,” said the official lately. “That’s going to take a while.” Trump only reinforced the uncertainty, saying in an discussion recently that there is no “hard” deadline for Hamas to disarm. So, theoretically, the unnamed participants of this still unformed international contingent could deploy to the territory while the organization's fighters still hold power. Are they facing a leadership or a guerrilla movement? Among the many of the questions arising. Others might wonder what the outcome will be for average Palestinians under current conditions, with Hamas continuing to target its own opponents and opposition.

Current events have yet again underscored the omissions of local journalism on each side of the Gaza boundary. Every source seeks to scrutinize all conceivable aspect of the group's violations of the peace. And, usually, the fact that the organization has been stalling the return of the bodies of slain Israeli captives has monopolized the coverage.

On the other hand, attention of civilian fatalities in Gaza stemming from Israeli attacks has received scant attention – if at all. Consider the Israeli response actions in the wake of Sunday’s Rafah incident, in which a pair of troops were lost. While Gaza’s sources claimed dozens of fatalities, Israeli media commentators questioned the “light response,” which focused on just facilities.

This is typical. Over the recent weekend, Gaza’s press agency alleged Israel of infringing the peace with the group multiple occasions since the ceasefire was implemented, killing 38 Palestinians and wounding another many more. The assertion was unimportant to most Israeli media outlets – it was merely absent. Even information that eleven individuals of a Palestinian family were fatally shot by Israeli troops a few days ago.

The emergency services reported the individuals had been trying to go back to their home in the a Gaza City area of Gaza City when the vehicle they were in was fired upon for reportedly going over the “yellow line” that defines areas under Israeli military control. This boundary is invisible to the human eye and is visible just on maps and in official records – not always available to everyday individuals in the region.

Even that event hardly got a note in Israeli journalism. A major outlet mentioned it shortly on its online platform, quoting an Israeli military official who stated that after a suspicious car was spotted, troops fired warning shots towards it, “but the car persisted to move toward the forces in a way that caused an imminent danger to them. The soldiers engaged to remove the danger, in line with the truce.” Zero fatalities were claimed.

Amid such narrative, it is understandable a lot of Israelis feel the group solely is to responsible for violating the ceasefire. That belief threatens prompting demands for a more aggressive strategy in the region.

Eventually – perhaps in the near future – it will no longer be adequate for all the president’s men to play caretakers, advising the Israeli government what not to do. They will {have to|need