🔗 Share this article

These times exhibit a quite distinctive situation: the pioneering US procession of the caretakers. They vary in their qualifications and characteristics, but they all possess the common objective – to prevent an Israeli violation, or even devastation, of Gaza’s unstable peace agreement. Since the hostilities ended, there have been few occasions without at least one of the former president's envoys on the territory. Just recently included the likes of Jared Kushner, a businessman, a senator and Marco Rubio – all coming to carry out their roles.

The Israeli government occupies their time. In only a few short period it executed a set of attacks in Gaza after the loss of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) troops – leading, based on accounts, in many of Palestinian casualties. Several leaders demanded a resumption of the war, and the Israeli parliament passed a preliminary decision to annex the occupied territories. The American reaction was somehow between “no” and “hell no.”

But in several ways, the American government appears more intent on maintaining the current, unstable stage of the truce than on moving to the subsequent: the rebuilding of the Gaza Strip. When it comes to that, it appears the US may have ambitions but few tangible strategies.

For now, it remains unknown when the proposed international governing body will effectively begin operating, and the same applies to the proposed peacekeeping troops – or even the composition of its soldiers. On Tuesday, a US official stated the United States would not impose the composition of the international contingent on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s government keeps to dismiss various proposals – as it acted with the Ankara's offer this week – what follows? There is also the contrary point: who will determine whether the troops supported by the Israelis are even interested in the task?

The matter of the duration it will require to demilitarize Hamas is just as ambiguous. “The aim in the leadership is that the multinational troops is intends to now assume responsibility in demilitarizing the organization,” said the official recently. “It’s will require a while.” Trump further emphasized the uncertainty, declaring in an conversation on Sunday that there is no “fixed” deadline for Hamas to demilitarize. So, hypothetically, the unnamed participants of this not yet established global contingent could enter the territory while Hamas fighters still hold power. Are they dealing with a leadership or a guerrilla movement? Among the many of the questions surfacing. Some might ask what the outcome will be for ordinary civilians as things stand, with Hamas persisting to target its own political rivals and critics.

Recent incidents have afresh emphasized the omissions of local journalism on each side of the Gazan border. Each publication attempts to examine every possible aspect of Hamas’s breaches of the ceasefire. And, usually, the situation that the organization has been stalling the repatriation of the bodies of killed Israeli captives has monopolized the coverage.

On the other hand, coverage of non-combatant casualties in the region stemming from Israeli attacks has received minimal notice – if at all. Consider the Israeli retaliatory strikes after a recent southern Gaza incident, in which a pair of soldiers were killed. While local officials stated 44 fatalities, Israeli television commentators criticised the “moderate reaction,” which targeted solely installations.

This is typical. Over the recent few days, the press agency alleged Israel of infringing the peace with Hamas 47 times after the truce came into effect, resulting in the loss of dozens of Palestinians and injuring another many more. The allegation seemed irrelevant to the majority of Israeli media outlets – it was just absent. Even information that eleven individuals of a Palestinian family were lost their lives by Israeli troops last Friday.

Gaza’s civil defence agency stated the family had been trying to go back to their home in the Zeitoun area of Gaza City when the transport they were in was fired upon for reportedly passing the “demarcation line” that demarcates areas under Israeli army command. This yellow line is not visible to the human eye and shows up only on charts and in official documents – often not available to ordinary people in the region.

Even this event scarcely got a note in Israeli media. A major outlet referred to it in passing on its online platform, quoting an Israeli military spokesperson who explained that after a suspect car was spotted, soldiers shot warning shots towards it, “but the transport persisted to approach the forces in a manner that caused an immediate risk to them. The forces shot to eliminate the threat, in accordance with the agreement.” No casualties were stated.

Given such narrative, it is little wonder numerous Israeli citizens believe the group exclusively is to at fault for infringing the ceasefire. This belief could lead to encouraging appeals for a tougher approach in Gaza.

Eventually – possibly sooner than expected – it will not be adequate for all the president’s men to play supervisors, advising Israel what to avoid. They will {have to|need