🔗 Share this article

These days present a quite unusual phenomenon: the inaugural US parade of the overseers. They vary in their skills and characteristics, but they all share the common goal – to prevent an Israeli breach, or even destruction, of the delicate truce. Since the hostilities ended, there have been rare occasions without at least one of Donald Trump’s envoys on the scene. Just recently included the likes of a senior advisor, Steve Witkoff, JD Vance and a political figure – all appearing to perform their assignments.

The Israeli government keeps them busy. In only a few days it launched a series of operations in Gaza after the loss of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) personnel – resulting, based on accounts, in dozens of Palestinian casualties. Several leaders urged a renewal of the war, and the Knesset passed a early resolution to take over the West Bank. The US response was somehow between “no” and “hell no.”

But in various respects, the Trump administration seems more intent on preserving the current, uneasy phase of the truce than on moving to the next: the rebuilding of Gaza. Concerning this, it seems the US may have ambitions but little specific proposals.

Currently, it is unclear at what point the planned multinational administrative entity will actually begin operating, and the similar is true for the designated security force – or even the composition of its personnel. On a recent day, Vance stated the United States would not force the composition of the foreign contingent on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet keeps to dismiss multiple options – as it did with the Ankara's proposal recently – what occurs next? There is also the contrary issue: who will determine whether the forces supported by the Israelis are even prepared in the task?

The issue of how long it will require to demilitarize the militant group is just as unclear. “Our hope in the leadership is that the global peacekeeping unit is intends to now take the lead in neutralizing the organization,” stated Vance this week. “It’s going to take a while.” Trump further emphasized the uncertainty, stating in an discussion a few days ago that there is no “fixed” deadline for the group to disarm. So, theoretically, the unidentified elements of this not yet established international force could arrive in Gaza while Hamas militants still remain in control. Are they confronting a leadership or a guerrilla movement? These represent only some of the concerns surfacing. Some might ask what the outcome will be for everyday civilians under current conditions, with the group continuing to focus on its own political rivals and opposition.

Current events have once again highlighted the blind spots of local journalism on each side of the Gazan boundary. Each publication attempts to examine all conceivable perspective of Hamas’s infractions of the peace. And, typically, the situation that Hamas has been stalling the return of the bodies of deceased Israeli captives has taken over the coverage.

By contrast, coverage of civilian deaths in the region stemming from Israeli strikes has received little notice – or none. Consider the Israeli response attacks after Sunday’s southern Gaza event, in which two soldiers were fatally wounded. While Gaza’s sources claimed 44 fatalities, Israeli media commentators complained about the “limited reaction,” which hit just facilities.

This is nothing new. During the recent weekend, the press agency accused Israeli forces of breaking the ceasefire with the group 47 times after the agreement was implemented, resulting in the loss of dozens of Palestinians and wounding another many more. The assertion seemed unimportant to most Israeli news programmes – it was just missing. Even accounts that eleven individuals of a local family were lost their lives by Israeli soldiers a few days ago.

Gaza’s emergency services said the individuals had been trying to go back to their home in the a Gaza City neighbourhood of Gaza City when the transport they were in was attacked for allegedly going over the “boundary” that marks territories under Israeli army command. This limit is unseen to the naked eye and is visible only on plans and in government records – not always obtainable to average people in the region.

Even this occurrence scarcely got a mention in Israeli journalism. Channel 13 News referred to it briefly on its online platform, referencing an IDF spokesperson who said that after a suspicious car was detected, forces fired cautionary rounds towards it, “but the vehicle persisted to approach the forces in a manner that posed an direct danger to them. The troops opened fire to neutralize the threat, in accordance with the agreement.” Zero injuries were claimed.

Amid such narrative, it is no surprise many Israeli citizens believe the group solely is to blame for infringing the ceasefire. That view threatens prompting calls for a more aggressive approach in Gaza.

Eventually – perhaps in the near future – it will not be adequate for US envoys to play kindergarten teachers, telling Israel what to avoid. They will {have to|need