🔗 Share this article

Thhese days showcase a quite unique occurrence: the inaugural US parade of the overseers. Their attributes range in their qualifications and characteristics, but they all have the common mission – to stop an Israeli infringement, or even devastation, of Gaza’s delicate peace agreement. Since the war concluded, there have been scant occasions without at least one of the former president's envoys on the territory. Only recently saw the arrival of Jared Kushner, a businessman, a senator and Marco Rubio – all appearing to execute their duties.

The Israeli government engages them fully. In only a few days it launched a series of strikes in the region after the deaths of two Israel Defense Forces (IDF) personnel – resulting, based on accounts, in many of Palestinian injuries. A number of officials called for a resumption of the fighting, and the Israeli parliament enacted a preliminary decision to take over the West Bank. The American response was somewhere between “no” and “hell no.”

But in more than one sense, the American government seems more concentrated on maintaining the present, tense period of the peace than on advancing to the next: the rehabilitation of Gaza. Regarding that, it appears the United States may have goals but no specific strategies.

For now, it is unclear at what point the planned global oversight committee will effectively begin operating, and the same is true for the designated security force – 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 the Israeli government. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s administration continues to reject various proposals – as it did with the Turkish proposal lately – what follows? There is also the contrary point: who will establish whether the troops preferred by the Israelis are even interested in the task?

The issue of the timeframe it will require to demilitarize the militant group is similarly vague. “The expectation in the government is that the multinational troops is going to at this point assume responsibility in disarming Hamas,” stated the official lately. “It’s may need a period.” The former president only highlighted the uncertainty, declaring in an discussion on Sunday that there is no “rigid” schedule for Hamas to lay down arms. So, in theory, the unidentified members of this yet-to-be-formed international contingent could arrive in Gaza while the organization's militants continue to wield influence. Are they dealing with a leadership or a insurgent group? These are just a few of the questions surfacing. Others might ask what the result will be for ordinary residents under current conditions, with the group continuing to focus on its own opponents and opposition.

Current events have yet again emphasized the blind spots of local media coverage on the two sides of the Gaza border. Every source strives to scrutinize all conceivable aspect of the group's violations of the ceasefire. And, usually, the situation that Hamas has been stalling the repatriation of the remains of killed Israeli captives has taken over the coverage.

Conversely, coverage of civilian fatalities in Gaza resulting from Israeli operations has garnered little notice – if at all. Take the Israeli retaliatory attacks following a recent Rafah occurrence, in which two troops were killed. While local sources stated dozens of deaths, Israeli media commentators complained about the “moderate response,” which targeted solely infrastructure.

That is not new. During the recent weekend, the information bureau charged Israel of breaking the ceasefire with Hamas multiple times since the agreement was implemented, causing the death of 38 Palestinians and wounding an additional 143. The allegation seemed irrelevant to the majority of Israeli reporting – it was merely ignored. That included reports that 11 members of a Palestinian family were lost their lives by Israeli troops last Friday.

The rescue organization stated the family had been trying to return to their residence in the a Gaza City neighbourhood of the city when the transport they were in was targeted for allegedly going over the “yellow line” that defines zones under Israeli army authority. That boundary is invisible to the ordinary view and appears solely on charts and in authoritative records – not always available to ordinary residents in the area.

Even this incident barely received a reference in Israeli media. A major outlet mentioned it briefly on its digital site, quoting an IDF spokesperson who explained that after a questionable car was detected, troops discharged warning shots towards it, “but the transport persisted to move toward the troops in a manner that created an direct danger to them. The forces engaged to remove the threat, in line with the ceasefire.” No injuries were stated.

With this framing, it is no surprise many Israeli citizens think Hamas exclusively is to responsible for violating the ceasefire. This perception could lead to prompting calls for a tougher approach in the region.

Sooner or later – maybe sooner rather than later – it will not be adequate for US envoys to act as caretakers, advising the Israeli government what not to do. They will {have to|need