Factbox: Gaza’s Philadelphi Corridor and Its Significance in Ceasefire Negotiations

The status of a narrow strip of land known as the Philadelphi corridor on Gaza’s border with Egypt has become a major obstacle in the ongoing efforts to achieve a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, which has been fighting for 11 months.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insists that Israel must maintain its forces in the corridor to prevent it from turning into a route for Hamas to smuggle weapons into Gaza. In contrast, Egypt argues that Israel needs to withdraw, while Hamas demands that Israeli troops exit the entire Gaza Strip.

The Philadelphi corridor is approximately 14 kilometers (9 miles) long, stretching from the Mediterranean Sea to the Israeli-controlled Kerem Shalom crossing. Israel has referred to it as the Philadelphi corridor, while Palestinians and Egyptians commonly refer to it as the Salah al-Din route.

The security of this border area has long been a priority for Israel. Following its withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, attacks on Israeli soldiers patrolling the corridor were frequent. As part of that withdrawal, Israel and Egypt signed an agreement to deploy a 750-strong Egyptian border guard to address smuggling and militant activity. Control of the Gazan side was transferred to the Palestinian Authority until Hamas took over in 2007.

Israel regained control of the Philadelphi corridor in May during its operations in Rafah, located in southern Gaza. The Israeli government claims that maintaining security in this corridor is crucial because Hamas has been known to use tunnels connecting Gaza to Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula for weapon smuggling. Despite Israel’s 2005 withdrawal, a substantial network of tunnels continued to function, with reports of around 50 tunnels identified in Rafah following the recent Israeli incursion.

While Egypt has stated it dismantled the tunnel network on its side to combat an Islamist insurgency in northern Sinai, it also established a buffer zone and border fortifications to prevent smuggling.

For Palestinians, the corridor holds significant importance. Since Hamas assumed control over Gaza, both Israel and Egypt have enforced a blockade on the region, heavily regulating movement through the Rafah crossing, which is on the Philadelphi corridor and is the only crossing not directly controlled by Israel. Although access is restricted, it has served as a vital route for Palestinians, allowing some to travel in and out and facilitating trade. After the war began on October 7, the Rafah crossing became the main point for humanitarian aid and medical evacuations. However, Israel’s recent military actions have resulted in its closure, severely limiting aid deliveries.

Egypt maintains that the corridor’s status is guaranteed by its 1979 peace treaty with Israel, asserting that Israel should withdraw and a Palestinian presence at Rafah should be restored. The Israeli military’s advance has undermined Egypt’s role as a mediator in cross-border access, complicating its leverage over Hamas. This situation is particularly sensitive for Egypt, which is cautious of conflict spilling over into its territory, particularly given its history with Israel and the potential influx of displaced Palestinians.

The Philadelphi corridor is currently a focal point in ceasefire negotiations. Israel’s insistence on retaining troops in both the Philadelphi and Netzarim corridors has become a critical sticking point. Over the course of the negotiations, Hamas has emphasized the need for a permanent ceasefire and the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza, seeking improved mobility for Palestinians displaced by the conflict.

Egypt, which is mediating the ceasefire discussions alongside the United States and Qatar, has expressed frustration with Israeli assertions regarding the security of its border with Gaza. Negotiations have included proposals for surveillance systems that could enable Israel to withdraw its forces upon the establishment of a ceasefire, as well as the potential deployment of international monitors at the border.

Netanyahu has firmly rejected the idea of withdrawing from the corridor in the initial stages of any ceasefire agreement, stating that Israel would only consider a permanent ceasefire under the condition that guarantees for corridor security are established.