🔗 Share this article

Thhese times showcase a quite unusual situation: the inaugural US march of the overseers. Their qualifications differ in their skills and characteristics, but they all possess the common goal – to stop an Israeli infringement, or even destruction, of Gaza’s delicate peace agreement. After the hostilities ended, there have been scant occasions without at least one of the former president's representatives on the territory. Just recently saw the arrival of a senior advisor, a businessman, a senator and Marco Rubio – all coming to perform their roles.

The Israeli government keeps them busy. In just a few days it initiated a set of operations in Gaza after the loss of a pair of Israeli military troops – leading, as reported, in dozens of local injuries. Several officials urged a renewal of the conflict, and the Knesset enacted a preliminary measure to incorporate the West Bank. The US response was somehow ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in various respects, the American government seems more focused on upholding the present, unstable stage of the peace than on advancing to the subsequent: the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip. Concerning this, it appears the US may have ambitions but no tangible proposals.

Currently, it is unclear at what point the proposed international oversight committee will truly take power, and the same applies to the proposed military contingent – or even the makeup of its members. On Tuesday, a US official stated the United States would not force the membership of the international contingent on the Israeli government. But if the prime minister's government continues to dismiss one alternative after another – as it acted with the Ankara's offer lately – what happens then? There is also the contrary issue: who will determine whether the forces favoured by the Israelis are even prepared in the mission?

The question of the duration it will need to neutralize the militant group is similarly unclear. “Our hope in the leadership is that the multinational troops is going to at this point take the lead in neutralizing the organization,” said Vance this week. “It’s may need a while.” Trump further highlighted the ambiguity, saying in an interview a few days ago that there is no “fixed” timeline for the group to demilitarize. So, hypothetically, the unidentified participants of this yet-to-be-formed global contingent could arrive in Gaza while Hamas fighters still remain in control. Would they be facing a leadership or a militant faction? These are just a few of the questions arising. Some might wonder what the result will be for ordinary Palestinians under current conditions, with the group continuing to target its own adversaries and critics.

Recent developments have yet again emphasized the blind spots of local media coverage on both sides of the Gazan boundary. Each outlet seeks to scrutinize all conceivable angle of the group's breaches of the ceasefire. And, typically, the situation that the organization has been delaying the return of the remains of slain Israeli captives has taken over the coverage.

Conversely, coverage of civilian deaths in Gaza stemming from Israeli operations has received minimal attention – or none. Take the Israeli retaliatory strikes following Sunday’s Rafah event, in which two soldiers were lost. While local officials reported 44 fatalities, Israeli news pundits criticised the “moderate reaction,” which focused on solely infrastructure.

This is typical. Over the recent few days, Gaza’s media office alleged Israeli forces of infringing the ceasefire with the group 47 occasions after the truce was implemented, causing the death of 38 Palestinians and injuring an additional 143. The claim was unimportant to the majority of Israeli news programmes – it was just missing. This applied to reports that 11 members of a Palestinian family were killed by Israeli forces last Friday.

Gaza’s civil defence agency stated the group had been attempting to go back to their dwelling in the a Gaza City neighbourhood of Gaza City when the vehicle they were in was attacked for reportedly crossing the “demarcation line” that demarcates zones under Israeli army control. This boundary is unseen to the ordinary view and is visible only on plans and in official papers – sometimes not obtainable to everyday individuals in the region.

Even this incident barely got a note in Israeli media. Channel 13 News referred to it in passing on its website, citing an Israeli military spokesperson who said that after a suspect car was identified, troops shot warning shots towards it, “but the transport continued to move toward the troops in a manner that posed an direct threat to them. The soldiers engaged to eliminate the risk, in accordance with the truce.” Zero injuries were claimed.

With this perspective, it is understandable a lot of Israelis think Hamas alone is to at fault for infringing the truce. That belief threatens prompting appeals for a more aggressive approach in Gaza.

Sooner or later – maybe in the near future – it will not be enough for all the president’s men to take on the role of kindergarten teachers, telling the Israeli government what not to do. They will {have to|need