🔗 Share this article

These times present a very unusual phenomenon: the pioneering US procession of the overseers. Their attributes range in their expertise and attributes, but they all share the identical goal – to stop an Israeli infringement, or even devastation, of the unstable peace agreement. After the conflict ended, there have been few occasions without at least one of Donald Trump’s envoys on the ground. Just this past week included the presence of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, a senator and a political figure – all appearing to execute their assignments.

The Israeli government keeps them busy. In only a few days it launched a series of attacks in the region after the killings of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) personnel – leading, as reported, in many of local fatalities. Multiple ministers called for a renewal of the fighting, and the Israeli parliament approved a preliminary measure to incorporate the occupied territories. The US response was somewhere ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

However in various respects, the US leadership appears more concentrated on maintaining the existing, uneasy phase of the ceasefire than on progressing to the following: the reconstruction of Gaza. When it comes to that, it looks the US may have ambitions but few tangible plans.

For now, it remains unclear when the suggested international oversight committee will effectively take power, and the same applies to the proposed security force – or even the composition of its personnel. On a recent day, a US official said the US would not impose the membership of the international contingent on the Israeli government. But if the prime minister's government continues to dismiss multiple options – as it did with the Ankara's proposal recently – what follows? There is also the opposite point: which party will establish whether the forces preferred by Israel are even willing in the assignment?

The matter of how long it will take to demilitarize the militant group is equally unclear. “The aim in the leadership is that the global peacekeeping unit is will at this point assume responsibility in neutralizing Hamas,” said Vance this week. “That’s may need a period.” Trump only emphasized the lack of clarity, saying in an discussion a few days ago that there is no “rigid” timeline for Hamas to disarm. So, theoretically, the unnamed elements of this not yet established international contingent could enter Gaza while Hamas members still wield influence. Are they facing a governing body or a guerrilla movement? These represent only some of the concerns surfacing. Some might question what the verdict will be for ordinary residents in the present situation, with Hamas carrying on to target its own political rivals and opposition.

Recent incidents have afresh underscored the omissions of Israeli journalism on each side of the Gazan boundary. Each publication attempts to analyze every possible perspective of the group's breaches of the peace. And, usually, the reality that the organization has been delaying the return of the bodies of deceased Israeli captives has monopolized the news.

By contrast, attention of non-combatant deaths in the region resulting from Israeli operations has garnered little focus – or none. Take the Israeli retaliatory actions in the wake of a recent Rafah occurrence, in which a pair of troops were lost. While local authorities stated dozens of fatalities, Israeli television pundits questioned the “moderate reaction,” which targeted solely infrastructure.

That is nothing new. Over the past weekend, the information bureau alleged Israeli forces of violating the ceasefire with Hamas 47 occasions since the agreement was implemented, resulting in the loss of 38 Palestinians and wounding another many more. The assertion appeared insignificant to most Israeli reporting – it was merely missing. Even information that eleven individuals of a Palestinian family were lost their lives by Israeli troops a few days ago.

Gaza’s civil defence agency stated the individuals had been trying to go back to their residence in the Zeitoun neighbourhood of Gaza City when the transport they were in was targeted for reportedly crossing the “yellow line” that marks areas under Israeli army authority. That yellow line is not visible to the ordinary view and shows up just on plans and in government papers – sometimes not accessible to ordinary people in the territory.

Even this incident barely received a reference in Israeli media. Channel 13 News covered it shortly on its digital site, referencing an Israeli military representative who explained that after a suspect car was spotted, troops fired cautionary rounds towards it, “but the car kept to advance on the forces in a way that created an immediate danger to them. The forces shot to remove the threat, in accordance with the truce.” No casualties were stated.

With such perspective, it is understandable many Israeli citizens feel Hamas solely is to responsible for breaking the truce. That belief threatens encouraging calls for a tougher stance in the region.

Sooner or later – possibly sooner rather than later – it will not be enough for US envoys to play supervisors, advising Israel what to refrain from. They will {have to|need