Despite Egypt’s firm rejection of the invasion of Rafah, the United States’ stance against a large-scale operation in the city, as emphasized by President Biden, and the international support for these positions in various forms, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu proceeded to step into the minefield, disregarding these warnings. He initiated a “limited” operation in Rafah with the objective of encircling the city and fully enforcing the blockade policy on the Gaza Strip. The “limited” Israeli operation involved the seizure and control of the Palestinian side of the Rafah crossing. Additionally, Israeli military vehicles were photographed while moving along the Philadelphi Corridor, also known as the Salah al-Din Corridor. Seizing the Palestinian side of the crossing means controlling the entry of aid into the exhausted and famine-prone Strip, while being present along the Philadelphi Corridor, even if only symbolically, would be a clear provocation to Egypt and akin to playing with fire. Presence along that Corridor is governed by an agreement between Egypt and Israel, initially signed in 2005 following Israel’s withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, and later modified in 2021.
Netanyahu’s decision to enter the Rafah “minefield” amidst ongoing negotiations between Israel and Hamas, particularly after Hamas had expressed support for the Egyptian proposal for calm and a prisoner exchange deal, demonstrates his determination to disrupt the negotiation process. This move also serves to appease the far right within his government, showing them that he is committed to taking action in Rafah, despite the potential dangers and the risk of explosive mines. Netanyahu’s actions convey his refusal to yield to pressure, even if it comes from the United States.
This stance taken by Netanyahu is also a result of what may be described as the confusion created by Hamas’ last-minute approval of the Egyptian proposal, at which point Netanyahu was setting up a “trap” for Hamas, reasoning that it would refuse to accept the Egyptian proposal. His reasoning was based on Hamas’ targeting of the Karam Abu Salem crossing. He had intended to use Hamas’ attack on the crossing and its envisioned refusal of the Egyptian proposal to launch a media and political campaign against Hamas, attributing the failure of the negotiations to them, enabling him to alleviate the pressure and proceed with his extensive operation in Rafah. Nevertheless, Hamas’ decision to accept the Egyptian proposal compelled Netanyahu to opt for a limited military operation in order to appease the United States and the far right. The far right advocates for an invasion of Rafah, regardless of the pressures and outcomes. This invasion would put all parties, not solely Israel, in a dire situation, particularly if Egypt’s patience wears thin and it is compelled to alter its approach towards Israel, potentially impacting the Egypt-Israel peace treaty. Since the commencement of the Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip, which has persisted for approximately seven months, the Egypt–Israel peace treaty has encountered its most severe and perilous test or challenge since its signing in 1979. The treaty is like the spokes of a wheel; without it, the cart will remain stationary, as former Israeli defense minister Moshe Dayan puts it. Regarding Netanyahu, he strongly maintains the position of pushing the treaty to its limits, arguing that the invasion of Rafah does not breach the treaty. For its part, Egypt regards the treaty as the foundation of security and stability in the Middle East, emphasizing its unwavering commitment to resolving conflicts peacefully within the framework of bilateral and international agreements.
In the past decade, Egyptian-Israeli relations have undergone a period of pacification that has enabled the amendment of an international security agreement with Israel on November 7, 2021, in order to bolster Egyptian presence in the Rafah border area. Public discussion of the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty waned, as opposed to the period from 2011 to 2013, during which there was considerable ambiguity surrounding the treaty and calls for its cancellation or modification, to the extent that, in 2012, the treaty and peace with Israel as a whole were one of the main pillars of the platforms of the candidates for the presidency. This development marked a departure from the previous trajectory of Egyptian-Israeli relations.
Now, amid clear international inaction, Israel insists on jeopardizing the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, as reported by the Associated Press on February 11, 2024, when it confirmed that Egypt might suspend the treaty if Israeli forces invade Rafah. This is in line with what The Wall Street Journal confirmed on February 10, 2024, when it stated that an invasion of Rafah by the Israeli army would be a breach of the peace treaty and effectively suspend it. Egypt did not show any official indication of considering the suspension or cancellation of the treaty. Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry affirmed on February 12 that Egypt remains steadfast in its dedication to the 45-year-old peace agreement with Israel. This demonstrates a strong dedication to Egyptian policy, which upholds its responsibilities and recognizes the significance of the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty. Cairo consistently strives to ensure the treaty’s success and prevent the risks associated with Netanyahu’s confrontational tactics and tirelessly endeavors to achieve a ceasefire and prisoner exchange agreement, in order to thwart Netanyahu’s attempts to unleash widespread turmoil and instability in the Middle East region.
