🔗 Share this article

These days showcase a very distinctive situation: the inaugural US procession of the babysitters. Their attributes range in their expertise and characteristics, but they all have the same mission – to stop an Israeli infringement, or even demolition, of the fragile peace agreement. After the war concluded, there have been few occasions without at least one of the former president's envoys on the scene. Just recently included the likes of Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, a senator and Marco Rubio – all arriving to perform their assignments.

The Israeli government keeps them busy. In just a few days it executed a series of operations in Gaza after the killings of a pair of Israeli military personnel – resulting, based on accounts, in dozens of local fatalities. Multiple officials demanded a restart of the conflict, and the Israeli parliament passed a early decision to incorporate the West Bank. The US reaction was somewhere ranging from “no” and “hell no.”

Yet in various respects, the US leadership seems more focused on maintaining the existing, tense phase of the peace than on advancing to the next: the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip. Regarding that, it looks the US may have aspirations but no specific strategies.

For now, it remains uncertain when the suggested multinational governing body will truly begin operating, and the similar applies to the designated security force – or even the composition of its soldiers. On a recent day, a US official said the US would not impose the membership of the international contingent on Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet keeps to refuse one alternative after another – as it acted with the Turkish offer this week – what happens then? There is also the reverse question: who will decide whether the troops favoured by the Israelis are even interested in the assignment?

The question of how long it will need to disarm the militant group is similarly vague. “Our hope in the administration is that the global peacekeeping unit is going to at this point take charge in demilitarizing the organization,” remarked the official lately. “It’s going to take a period.” The former president further reinforced the ambiguity, saying in an conversation a few days ago that there is no “fixed” schedule for Hamas to demilitarize. So, hypothetically, the unknown elements of this still unformed global contingent could deploy to the territory while Hamas fighters continue to wield influence. Are they confronting a governing body or a militant faction? These are just a few of the concerns surfacing. Others might ask what the result will be for everyday civilians as things stand, with Hamas persisting to focus on its own political rivals and opposition.

Latest developments have afresh underscored the gaps of Israeli reporting on each side of the Gaza boundary. Each source attempts to examine all conceivable perspective of the group's breaches of the truce. And, in general, the fact that the organization has been stalling the repatriation of the remains of slain Israeli captives has taken over the news.

Conversely, attention of non-combatant casualties in the region resulting from Israeli strikes has received little notice – if any. Take the Israeli retaliatory strikes following Sunday’s Rafah event, in which a pair of soldiers were fatally wounded. While local authorities claimed 44 casualties, Israeli media commentators questioned the “light reaction,” which hit solely infrastructure.

This is typical. Over the previous weekend, the information bureau accused Israeli forces of breaking the peace with the group multiple occasions after the agreement was implemented, causing the death of dozens of individuals and wounding an additional 143. The assertion was unimportant to the majority of Israeli reporting – it was simply ignored. Even information that eleven individuals of a Palestinian family were lost their lives by Israeli forces last Friday.

Gaza’s rescue organization reported the family had been trying to return to their home in the a Gaza City area of the city when the transport they were in was targeted for supposedly passing the “demarcation line” that defines territories under Israeli army authority. That boundary is not visible to the human eye and appears just on maps and in official records – often not accessible to ordinary residents in the region.

Even that occurrence barely received a mention in Israeli media. Channel 13 News covered it briefly on its online platform, citing an Israeli military official who explained that after a questionable vehicle was detected, forces shot warning shots towards it, “but the car continued to approach the forces in a fashion that created an imminent danger to them. The soldiers opened fire to eliminate the danger, in compliance with the truce.” Zero injuries were claimed.

Amid this narrative, it is little wonder many Israeli citizens think Hamas exclusively is to at fault for violating the truce. This perception could lead to encouraging calls for a tougher approach in Gaza.

At some point – maybe in the near future – it will not be sufficient for American representatives to play caretakers, telling the Israeli government what not to do. They will {have to|need