🔗 Share this article

These days showcase a very distinctive situation: the first-ever US procession of the overseers. Their attributes range in their expertise and characteristics, but they all possess the identical objective – to avert an Israeli infringement, or even devastation, of Gaza’s unstable truce. After the conflict ended, there have been few days without at least one of Donald Trump’s representatives on the territory. Just in the last few days included the likes of Jared Kushner, a businessman, a senator and Marco Rubio – all coming to execute their duties.

Israel keeps them busy. In just a few days it launched a wave of strikes in the region after the killings of a pair of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers – leading, as reported, in dozens of local injuries. A number of officials urged a resumption of the war, and the Israeli parliament passed a initial resolution to incorporate the West Bank. The American stance was somewhere ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

However in various respects, the American government seems more intent on preserving the present, unstable stage of the truce than on moving to the following: the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip. Concerning that, it appears the US may have aspirations but few tangible plans.

At present, it remains unclear when the suggested international administrative entity will effectively take power, and the same goes for the appointed security force – or even the identity of its members. On Tuesday, a US official stated the United States would not force the structure of the foreign unit on the Israeli government. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s government continues to reject one alternative after another – as it did with the Turkish proposal lately – what follows? There is also the opposite question: which party will decide whether the troops preferred by Israel are even prepared in the task?

The issue of the duration it will require to disarm the militant group is similarly ambiguous. “Our hope in the government is that the international security force is intends to at this point take charge in demilitarizing Hamas,” remarked the official recently. “That’s will require a while.” The former president further reinforced the uncertainty, saying in an conversation on Sunday that there is no “hard” timeline for the group to disarm. So, in theory, the unidentified elements of this not yet established international contingent could arrive in the territory while the organization's fighters still hold power. Would they be facing a leadership or a militant faction? Among the many of the concerns arising. Some might ask what the verdict will be for average civilians under current conditions, with Hamas continuing to target its own opponents and critics.

Current events have yet again underscored the blind spots of Israeli media coverage on both sides of the Gazan border. Every source strives to analyze each potential aspect of Hamas’s breaches of the ceasefire. And, usually, the fact that the organization has been stalling the return of the remains of killed Israeli captives has dominated the news.

On the other hand, coverage of non-combatant casualties in Gaza resulting from Israeli attacks has garnered little attention – or none. Consider the Israeli retaliatory actions following a recent southern Gaza event, in which a pair of military personnel were killed. While local sources reported dozens of casualties, Israeli media pundits criticised the “light reaction,” which focused on only infrastructure.

This is nothing new. During the previous weekend, the media office accused Israeli forces of violating the truce with Hamas multiple times after the agreement was implemented, resulting in the loss of dozens of individuals and injuring an additional 143. The allegation appeared insignificant to most Israeli reporting – it was just ignored. Even reports that 11 individuals of a local household were lost their lives by Israeli soldiers recently.

The civil defence agency reported the individuals had been attempting to return to their dwelling in the Zeitoun district of Gaza City when the transport they were in was targeted for supposedly passing the “yellow line” that demarcates zones under Israeli army command. This limit is not visible to the naked eye and appears only on charts and in authoritative papers – often not available to average residents in the region.

Even this occurrence scarcely rated a reference in Israeli media. One source mentioned it shortly on its online platform, referencing an Israeli military official who stated that after a questionable vehicle was spotted, troops shot alerting fire towards it, “but the vehicle continued to approach the troops in a fashion that caused an direct danger to them. The troops shot to eliminate the risk, in line with the ceasefire.” No fatalities were stated.

Given such narrative, it is no surprise numerous Israeli citizens think Hamas solely is to responsible for breaking the truce. That view risks prompting appeals for a stronger stance in the region.

Sooner or later – maybe in the near future – it will no longer be adequate for US envoys to play caretakers, advising the Israeli government what not to do. They will {have to|need