🔗 Share this article

Thhese times present a very unusual occurrence: the pioneering US procession of the babysitters. Their attributes range in their qualifications and traits, but they all share the same mission – to prevent an Israeli breach, or even demolition, of the delicate peace agreement. After the hostilities ended, there have been scant occasions without at least one of Donald Trump’s representatives on the scene. Just recently saw the likes of Jared Kushner, a businessman, JD Vance and a political figure – all coming to carry out their assignments.

Israel engages them fully. In only a few short period it executed a wave of strikes in the region after the killings of a pair of Israeli military troops – leading, based on accounts, in scores of Palestinian fatalities. A number of ministers urged a renewal of the conflict, and the Israeli parliament approved a initial measure to take over the West Bank. The US reaction was somewhere between “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in various respects, the US leadership appears more intent on maintaining the current, unstable phase of the ceasefire than on moving to the next: the rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip. When it comes to this, it appears the US may have goals but little specific strategies.

Currently, it remains uncertain when the suggested international governing body will truly take power, and the same applies to the appointed security force – or even the makeup of its members. On Tuesday, a US official said the United States would not dictate the membership of the international unit on the Israeli government. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s government continues to refuse various proposals – as it did with the Ankara's offer recently – what follows? There is also the reverse issue: who will determine whether the units favoured by the Israelis are even willing in the assignment?

The matter of the timeframe it will need to neutralize Hamas is similarly ambiguous. “The aim in the government is that the multinational troops is intends to now take charge in disarming the organization,” stated the official lately. “That’s going to take some time.” The former president further highlighted the lack of clarity, saying in an conversation recently that there is no “rigid” schedule for Hamas to demilitarize. So, in theory, the unnamed members of this still unformed international contingent could arrive in the territory while the organization's members still remain in control. Would they be dealing with a leadership or a insurgent group? These are just a few of the concerns surfacing. Some might question what the result will be for everyday civilians in the present situation, with the group carrying on to attack its own opponents and dissidents.

Current developments have yet again underscored the blind spots of local journalism on each side of the Gazan boundary. Every outlet attempts to analyze every possible aspect of Hamas’s infractions of the truce. And, typically, the reality that Hamas has been delaying the repatriation of the bodies of slain Israeli captives has monopolized the headlines.

On the other hand, attention of civilian casualties in the region resulting from Israeli strikes has received scant attention – if at all. Take the Israeli counter attacks following a recent southern Gaza occurrence, in which a pair of soldiers were killed. While local sources stated 44 casualties, Israeli media pundits complained about the “light answer,” which hit just installations.

This is nothing new. Over the recent weekend, Gaza’s media office alleged Israel of infringing the peace with Hamas multiple occasions after the agreement began, causing the death of 38 individuals and injuring an additional many more. The assertion appeared unimportant to most Israeli media outlets – it was just absent. This applied to information that eleven members of a Palestinian household were killed by Israeli soldiers last Friday.

Gaza’s emergency services said the individuals had been trying to go back to their residence in the a Gaza City district of the city when the bus they were in was fired upon for allegedly passing the “boundary” that marks areas under Israeli army authority. This yellow line is unseen to the ordinary view and shows up just on maps and in official documents – sometimes not accessible to everyday individuals in the territory.

Yet that incident barely got a mention in Israeli media. One source mentioned it briefly on its digital site, citing an Israeli military official who said that after a suspect vehicle was identified, soldiers shot cautionary rounds towards it, “but the vehicle persisted to move toward the soldiers in a fashion that caused an immediate danger to them. The forces opened fire to neutralize the danger, in line with the ceasefire.” No injuries were stated.

Given this framing, it is little wonder a lot of Israeli citizens think the group exclusively is to responsible for violating the truce. This view could lead to fuelling demands for a stronger strategy in Gaza.

Eventually – possibly sooner than expected – it will not be enough for US envoys to act as caretakers, telling Israel what to avoid. They will {have to|need