🔗 Share this article

Thhese times present a very distinctive occurrence: the first-ever US procession of the babysitters. Their qualifications differ in their expertise and traits, but they all possess the common goal – to avert an Israeli breach, or even devastation, of Gaza’s unstable peace agreement. After the hostilities concluded, there have been few occasions without at least one of Donald Trump’s delegates on the scene. Only in the last few days featured the presence of a senior advisor, a businessman, a senator and Marco Rubio – all arriving to perform their roles.

Israel occupies their time. In only a few short period it initiated a series of strikes in Gaza after the loss of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers – leading, according to reports, in scores of Palestinian fatalities. Several ministers called for a renewal of the fighting, and the Knesset approved a preliminary measure to take over the occupied territories. The US stance was somewhere ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

But in various respects, the US leadership seems more concentrated on upholding the current, tense phase of the truce than on advancing to the subsequent: the rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip. When it comes to this, it appears the US may have goals but little tangible strategies.

Currently, it remains uncertain when the proposed international governing body will actually take power, and the same applies to the proposed security force – or even the makeup of its members. On Tuesday, a US official declared the US would not dictate the membership of the international unit on Israel. But if the prime minister's government keeps to dismiss various proposals – as it acted with the Turkish proposal recently – what follows? There is also the reverse issue: who will determine whether the troops favoured by Israel are even interested in the assignment?

The matter of how long it will require to disarm Hamas is just as unclear. “The aim in the leadership is that the multinational troops is going to now take charge in neutralizing the organization,” stated the official lately. “That’s will require some time.” Trump further reinforced the ambiguity, declaring in an conversation a few days ago that there is no “hard” timeline for Hamas to demilitarize. So, in theory, the unidentified elements of this yet-to-be-formed international contingent could enter Gaza while the organization's fighters continue to hold power. Are they dealing with a administration or a guerrilla movement? These are just a few of the issues emerging. Some might question what the outcome will be for average civilians under current conditions, with Hamas continuing to focus on its own political rivals and opposition.

Latest developments have yet again emphasized the omissions of local journalism on both sides of the Gazan border. Each publication seeks to analyze all conceivable angle of Hamas’s breaches of the ceasefire. And, typically, the situation that Hamas has been delaying the return of the remains of deceased Israeli hostages has dominated the headlines.

On the other hand, attention of non-combatant deaths in Gaza resulting from Israeli attacks has garnered little attention – if at all. Take the Israeli response attacks in the wake of a recent Rafah occurrence, in which a pair of soldiers were killed. While Gaza’s authorities stated dozens of deaths, Israeli media analysts questioned the “limited answer,” which focused on only infrastructure.

That is nothing new. During the past weekend, Gaza’s press agency alleged Israel of breaking the peace with the group multiple occasions since the truce was implemented, causing the death of 38 Palestinians and injuring an additional many more. The claim appeared insignificant to the majority of Israeli media outlets – it was merely missing. That included information that eleven individuals of a Palestinian household were lost their lives by Israeli forces a few days ago.

The rescue organization said the family had been attempting to return to their home in the Zeitoun neighbourhood of Gaza City when the vehicle they were in was targeted for supposedly crossing the “boundary” that marks areas under Israeli army authority. That yellow line is not visible to the human eye and shows up just on charts and in authoritative papers – sometimes not obtainable to average residents in the region.

Even that occurrence barely received a note in Israeli news outlets. One source mentioned it shortly on its digital site, quoting an IDF representative who explained that after a suspect vehicle was spotted, soldiers discharged warning shots towards it, “but the transport kept to approach the forces in a fashion that created an immediate risk to them. The troops shot to eliminate the threat, in compliance with the ceasefire.” Zero fatalities were reported.

With such narrative, it is understandable a lot of Israelis feel the group alone is to blame for violating the peace. This perception could lead to fuelling calls for a tougher strategy in the region.

Sooner or later – possibly in the near future – it will no longer be sufficient for all the president’s men to act as supervisors, advising the Israeli government what to refrain from. They will {have to|need