🔗 Share this article

These times exhibit a very unusual phenomenon: the inaugural US parade of the caretakers. Their attributes range in their expertise and characteristics, but they all share the identical objective – to stop an Israeli infringement, or even demolition, of the fragile peace agreement. Since the war ended, there have been few days without at least one of Donald Trump’s representatives on the scene. Only in the last few days saw the presence of Jared Kushner, a businessman, a senator and Marco Rubio – all coming to perform their duties.

Israel keeps them busy. In only a few days it executed a wave of attacks in the region after the killings of a pair of Israeli military soldiers – resulting, according to reports, in scores of local casualties. A number of leaders urged a renewal of the conflict, and the Knesset approved a preliminary decision to incorporate the West Bank. The US reaction was somehow between “no” and “hell no.”

But in more than one sense, the American government appears more concentrated on maintaining the existing, tense period of the peace than on progressing to the next: the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip. Regarding this, it appears the US may have ambitions but little concrete strategies.

For now, it remains uncertain when the proposed international governing body will effectively take power, and the same applies to the proposed military contingent – or even the composition of its personnel. On Tuesday, a US official declared the US would not impose the composition of the foreign contingent on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet persists to refuse one alternative after another – as it acted with the Turkish suggestion this week – what occurs next? There is also the reverse point: who will establish whether the forces preferred by the Israelis are even willing in the assignment?

The matter of the duration it will take to neutralize the militant group is similarly ambiguous. “The aim in the administration is that the multinational troops is going to at this point take charge in disarming Hamas,” said Vance this week. “It’s will require some time.” Trump only reinforced the lack of clarity, declaring in an interview recently that there is no “rigid” schedule for the group to disarm. So, in theory, the unidentified participants of this still unformed global contingent could deploy to Gaza while the organization's militants still remain in control. Are they confronting a administration or a guerrilla movement? Among the many of the concerns surfacing. Some might wonder what the outcome will be for everyday civilians under current conditions, with the group carrying on to attack its own adversaries and critics.

Recent incidents have once again emphasized the gaps of local journalism on each side of the Gaza frontier. Every publication attempts to analyze all conceivable aspect of Hamas’s violations of the truce. And, typically, the reality that the organization has been delaying the repatriation of the remains of deceased Israeli captives has dominated the headlines.

On the other hand, attention of civilian casualties in the region caused by Israeli operations has received minimal notice – if any. Take the Israeli counter strikes in the wake of a recent southern Gaza occurrence, in which two military personnel were fatally wounded. While local sources claimed dozens of deaths, Israeli media pundits questioned the “light response,” which hit solely installations.

That is not new. During the past weekend, Gaza’s media office alleged Israeli forces of breaking the truce with the group multiple times after the agreement began, resulting in the loss of dozens of Palestinians and harming an additional many more. The allegation seemed irrelevant to most Israeli media outlets – it was just absent. This applied to information that 11 individuals of a local household were lost their lives by Israeli soldiers last Friday.

The civil defence agency stated the individuals had been attempting to go back to their dwelling in the Zeitoun area of Gaza City when the transport they were in was targeted for supposedly crossing the “yellow line” that marks zones under Israeli army authority. This yellow line is unseen to the naked eye and shows up only on charts and in official documents – often not obtainable to everyday individuals in the territory.

Yet this incident barely rated a reference in Israeli news outlets. One source mentioned it in passing on its website, referencing an Israeli military official who explained that after a suspicious transport was spotted, forces shot alerting fire towards it, “but the vehicle continued to approach the soldiers in a manner that caused an immediate risk to them. The troops opened fire to neutralize the risk, in line with the ceasefire.” Zero casualties were claimed.

Amid this framing, it is little wonder a lot of Israelis feel the group alone is to at fault for infringing the peace. That view could lead to fuelling calls for a more aggressive strategy in the region.

Sooner or later – maybe sooner than expected – it will no longer be sufficient for American representatives to act as caretakers, telling the Israeli government what to avoid. They will {have to|need