Israel’s control over the Philadelphia corridor has now become the cornerstone of our existence, the security foundation of our nation. The presence at the Rafah crossing is described in Prime Minister’s Office briefings as the keystone of national security. All our troubles began there. The moment we leave, Hamas will return to its capabilities of October 6. So, if that’s the case, why didn’t the Prime Minister already instruct the IDF in November to take control of the corridor? Why the seven-month delay?
You don’t need to be a celebrated military strategist to understand that the IDF presence in the Philadelphia corridor should be more effective at preventing Hamas’s renewed buildup than any Egyptian or international regime, no matter how advanced technologically. The question is whether the gap between Israeli effectiveness and the alternative justifies the collapse of the hostage deal — especially when considering a few facts. First, Israel controlled the Philadelphia corridor until the disengagement, and that did not block smuggling routes. More importantly, what prevents Israel, six months after completing the deal, from reasserting control over the corridor? There will likely be security incidents that can justify a return.
In the past week, Netanyahu publicly stated at least five times that a condition for any deal is Israeli operational control over Philadelphia. There’s no way to interpret this sudden obsession other than as a desire to sabotage the hostage deal. Netanyahu has gotten stuck in a problematic corridor. Hamas has in principle agreed to the Biden framework, including the ceasefire formula that ostensibly allows Israel to renew fighting after the first phase. It’s noticeable how quiet Itamar Ben-Gvir has been lately about the deal. He hasn’t even bothered to threaten. Apparently, he’s convinced Netanyahu has figured out the trick to blow it all up. The Biden framework says nothing about Rafah crossing or the Philadelphia corridor. It was drawn up before Israel entered there. It does say Israel must withdraw from population centers. Netanyahu understands that control over the Philadelphia corridor and Rafah may allow him to sabotage the deal without being accused of violating the framework.
The other players in the deal have understood this for a long time. The Americans, Egyptians, Qataris, and our own security establishment are working on producing reasonable security alternatives that will provide Netanyahu with some alibi if he wants one. A partial withdrawal from the Philadelphia corridor, beginning the installation of technology to prevent smuggling, and upgrading the Egyptian effort. Control over Rafah crossing is not supposed to be part of our list of demands. As long as we are there, the crossing can’t function at all. The proposed solution is a presence of Gazans who will be Palestinian Authority personnel. The hope is that when this matures, it will be harder for Netanyahu to bring down the deal over a few kilometers in Philadelphia or the organizational affiliation of the people on the Gaza side of Rafah crossing. According to those who speak to Netanyahu, that will be enough for him to bury the deal.
The negotiations have been led from the start by Mossad chief David Barnea. Many in the war cabinet have wondered why him in particular. In the Gilad Shalit deal there was a special coordinator and significant involvement of the Shin Bet chief, the knowledge hub regarding the identity of the security prisoners to be released. Was Barnea chosen this time because Netanyahu knew he would have more control over him? Brigadier General Nitzan Alon, appointed by the army regarding the hostages, has long been seen in Netanyahu’s office as a bitter rival. Netanyahu knows Alon might resign if this deal also falls through, and names of potential replacements are already being discussed. As for Barnea, nothing is heard. In the past, he said in closed talks that if he concludes Netanyahu is sabotaging the deal for non-substantive reasons, he would not hesitate to say so. Well, Netanyahu has already sabotaged deals for such reasons, but Barnea’s voice remains silent.