🔗 Share this article

Thhese days exhibit a quite distinctive occurrence: the first-ever US parade of the overseers. They vary in their qualifications and traits, but they all share the identical objective – to prevent an Israeli infringement, or even destruction, of the fragile ceasefire. Since the hostilities concluded, there have been rare occasions without at least one of the former president's delegates on the territory. Just in the last few days saw the presence of a senior advisor, Steve Witkoff, a senator and a political figure – all appearing to carry out their duties.

Israel keeps them busy. In just a few short period it initiated a wave of operations in the region after the deaths of a pair of Israeli military troops – resulting, according to reports, in dozens of local fatalities. Several ministers called for a renewal of the conflict, and the Knesset approved a initial resolution to annex the West Bank. The American response was somewhere between “no” and “hell no.”

However in more than one sense, the US leadership appears more focused on preserving the existing, unstable period of the peace than on moving to the next: the reconstruction of Gaza. Concerning that, it seems the US may have aspirations but few tangible strategies.

At present, it remains uncertain when the proposed international administrative entity will effectively take power, and the similar goes for the appointed peacekeeping troops – or even the identity of its members. On Tuesday, Vance stated the US would not force the structure of the international unit on the Israeli government. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s government persists to reject multiple options – as it did with the Ankara's suggestion lately – what follows? There is also the opposite issue: which party will establish whether the forces favoured by the Israelis are even interested in the assignment?

The matter of the duration it will require to neutralize the militant group is just as unclear. “The aim in the administration is that the international security force is will at this point take charge in neutralizing Hamas,” remarked Vance recently. “It’s going to take some time.” Trump further emphasized the ambiguity, saying in an conversation recently that there is no “fixed” timeline for Hamas to lay down arms. So, in theory, the unidentified members of this not yet established international contingent could arrive in Gaza while Hamas members still remain in control. Would they be facing a governing body or a militant faction? These represent only some of the questions surfacing. Some might ask what the verdict will be for average civilians as things stand, with the group persisting to target its own political rivals and critics.

Recent developments have yet again underscored the gaps of local media coverage on both sides of the Gaza frontier. Each outlet strives to scrutinize each potential aspect of Hamas’s breaches of the ceasefire. And, in general, the fact that the organization has been delaying the repatriation of the bodies of deceased Israeli captives has monopolized the news.

Conversely, coverage of civilian casualties in the region caused by Israeli operations has obtained minimal focus – if at all. Take the Israeli retaliatory strikes following a recent Rafah occurrence, in which two soldiers were fatally wounded. While local officials stated dozens of casualties, Israeli news analysts questioned the “light response,” which targeted solely facilities.

This is not new. During the past few days, Gaza’s media office alleged Israeli forces of infringing the truce with the group multiple times since the truce began, killing 38 individuals and injuring another 143. The claim seemed irrelevant to the majority of Israeli media outlets – it was simply absent. That included reports that eleven members of a local household were fatally shot by Israeli soldiers last Friday.

Gaza’s civil defence agency reported the group had been trying to go back to their residence in the Zeitoun neighbourhood of the city when the bus they were in was attacked for supposedly passing the “yellow line” that marks territories under Israeli military authority. That boundary is unseen to the human eye and shows up just on plans and in official documents – not always available to everyday people in the area.

Even that occurrence hardly got a note in Israeli journalism. Channel 13 News mentioned it in passing on its online platform, citing an Israeli military official who stated that after a questionable vehicle was identified, soldiers discharged warning shots towards it, “but the car kept to approach the troops in a way that created an immediate risk to them. The soldiers opened fire to neutralize the risk, in accordance with the ceasefire.” No injuries were claimed.

With such framing, it is understandable numerous Israelis feel Hamas solely is to at fault for infringing the peace. This view threatens encouraging appeals for a tougher strategy in the region.

Eventually – maybe sooner than expected – it will no longer be sufficient for all the president’s men to take on the role of caretakers, instructing Israel what to refrain from. They will {have to|need