The Philadelphia corridor has become a point of contention in ceasefire negotiations as Israel’s war on Gaza continues and the Palestinian death toll approaches 41,000.
In late May, Hamas and Israel appeared close to a deal that would have seen an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, the release of about 90 captives held in Gaza by armed groups and the release of hundreds of Palestinians from Israeli prisons.
However, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu then added four non-negotiable conditions, including retaining control of the Philadelphia Corridor, a 14km (8.5 mile) strip of land bordering Egypt.
On Monday, Netanyahu reiterated his position: “The axis of evil needs the Philadelphia corridor, and for this reason we must control it.”
“That’s why Hamas insists that we not be there, and that’s why I insist that we be there.”
Avoiding a ceasefire?
Hamas may have smuggled goods, perhaps even weapons, through Philadelphia in the years leading up to October 7, analysts told Tel Aviv Tribune, but Israel did not bother to control it.
This has led critics to believe that Netanyahu’s last-minute request has more to do with maintaining the war in Gaza than with any real security concerns.
“It’s basically an excuse that Netanyahu is using at this point,” Zachary Lockman, a Palestine-Israel expert at New York University, told Tel Aviv Tribune.
“He is looking for any pretext to avoid a hostage-taking or a ceasefire.”
Netanyahu has been the target of internal criticism from figures including his defense minister and Likud member Yoav Gallant.
“The fact that we are prioritizing the Philadelphia corridor at the cost of the lives of the hostages is a moral disgrace,” Gallant told ministers, according to the Times of Israel.
Some military officials criticized Netanyahu’s decision from a strategic perspective.
Israeli army chief of staff Herzi Halevi said keeping soldiers in the Philadelphia corridor would expose them to “unnecessary risks.”
Borrowed time
Analysts say Netanyahu understands that he is working on borrowed time and that the end of the war could mean the end of his term as prime minister.
“Netanyahu is a total failure on national security and foreign policy,” Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli ambassador and government adviser, told Tel Aviv Tribune, “but he is a good politician.”
That is why he will continue to fuel many fires – in Gaza, the occupied West Bank, Lebanon and beyond – until he reaches the point where he feels he can win another election, analysts said.
On October 7, Hamas carried out attacks on southern Israel, in which 1,139 people were killed and about 240 captured. About 90 prisoners remain in Gaza, most of whom are believed to be alive.
It’s not there yet, and public opinion in Israel has been fluctuating since October.
A poll in July found that 72% of Israelis wanted Netanyahu to resign immediately.
But another poll last week showed Netanyahu’s support was one percentage point lower than that of his main rival, Benny Gantz.
That gain for Netanyahu, however, came before Sunday, when the bodies of six Israeli prisoners were found in Gaza and thousands of Israelis took to the streets to protest the government.
“Israeli society is very fragmented and the anger comes from different sides… Perhaps Netanyahu thinks that as long as there is an existential threat from abroad, the unrest within the country as a whole can be contained through this pressure,” Omar Rahman, a fellow at the Middle East Council on Global Affairs, told Tel Aviv Tribune.
“As soon as these pressures and threats dissipate, divisions and calls for his removal will be felt and internal tensions will increase again.”
Is Netanyahu trying to change Camp David?
If Israeli troops in Gaza can be a deal-breaker for Hamas, those in Philadelphia are also a deal-breaker for another party.
Egypt, which is mediating the ceasefire negotiations, opposes the Israeli military presence in the corridor because it would violate agreements between the two countries.
There are also internal considerations. Egyptians are staunchly pro-Palestinian. Many want their government to do more and would be unhappy with an Israeli armed presence on the border.
But since Egypt is one of the few Arab countries to have normalized relations with Israel, neither internal pressure nor its refusal of Israel’s Philadelphia demand has led it to threaten to end these agreements.
The two countries signed a peace treaty in 1979, a year after the Camp David Accords, which brought together then-Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin.
This first peace agreement between Israel and an Arab country assures Egypt of support and financial aid from the United States: 2.1 billion dollars per year – 1.3 billion dollars in military aid and 815 million dollars in economic aid.
“Egypt has made some noise, but I don’t think they want to give up (Camp David) because it’s tied to their ties with the United States,” Lockman said.
Egypt, however, has become increasingly vocal about Israel’s actions in the West Bank.
In May, it joined South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice after Israel ignored international warnings not to launch an offensive in Rafah governorate in southern Gaza, where about half of Gaza’s population had been displaced.
On Tuesday, she lashed out at Netanyahu, saying he was misleading the Israeli people and looking for excuses to delay ceasefire negotiations.
The day before, Netanyahu had accused Egypt of failing to secure the Philadelphia Corridor, of allowing tunnels to be dug underneath it and of providing “oxygen” to Hamas.
Egypt is “clearly unhappy with this situation and also wants some sort of deal,” Lockman said, adding that unless Netanyahu is persuaded otherwise, the situation is “essentially out of their control.”
But even the prospect of a disgruntled neighbor and domestic and international criticism have so far failed to change Netanyahu’s mind about his demands in Philadelphia.
