Uninterested to end the war under the duress of his hardline ministers, the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is clinging to false scenarios to paint Hamas resistance movement the main party to blame for ongoing crisis.
In his recent speech, Netanyahu, using fake narratives in which he is skillful, tried to convince his audience that the reason for failure of the Doha ceasefire talks so far is not Tel Aviv and accusing him as the obstruction of the negotiations is a service to Hamas.
In an attempt to justify his positions, Netanyahu showed the map of Gaza and tried to prove that the army's control of the Philadelphi Corridor on the Egyptian borders is a strategic issue and that this control is the only guarantee against the flow of weapons to Hamas.
While talking about weapons smuggling in Hamas tunnels, the Israeli PM said that the Israelis have discovered only 20 percent of the tunnels in the last eleven months, and they do not have any documents or information about the rest of the tunnels. Most of these discoveries are the tunnels that exist in the center of Gaza, and those that Netanyahu claims have turned into weapons smuggling sites on the Egyptian border, still remain unknown.
Indeed, in the meantime, Netanyahu avoids answering the question that if the army's control of the Philadelphi Corridor has not been able to identify the alleged tunnels in Rafah for several months and Hamas continues to procure weapons in various ways and continue its missile attacks against the occupied territories, What problem will stay in Rafah settle? This gives foreign actors and political analysts every reason to suggest that Netanyahu is the main party putting skids under the ceasefire talks to delay end of war until the US elections determine who will become next president and also to mar Egyptian role in Palestinian developments, something not appealing to most of the Arab countries and drawing extensive reactions as did the Egyptians.
Arab world outrage
Netanyahu’s claims have drawn wode-ranging reactions from the Arab countries that strongly condemned the new claims about Philadelphi Corridor, saying that these remarks are meant to mislead the Israeli public opinion about prisoner swap and distract the global attention from the heinous Israeli crimes in Gaza.
Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs published a statement stating that Cairo expresses its strong opposition to Netanyahu's claims about the Philadelphi Corridor and emphasizes that Netanyahu, with these talks and involving Egypt, seeks to disrupt the path to a ceasefire agreement and the swap of prisoners and distract Israeli public from this issue. Egypt emphasized that it holds Israeli cabinet responsible for the consequences of such claims, which will lead to the escalation of the situation. The purpose of these talks is to justify aggressive policies that lead to further escalation of tensions in the region, the statement further said.
The anger of the Egyptians was so high that in the midst of the adventures of the Netanyahu government at the Rafah border, Ahmed Khalifa, the Chief of Staff of the Egyptian Armed Forces, in a surprise visit checked the security conditions and methods of protecting the border with the Gaza Strip on September 15. The visit of Egypt's top military official to the Gaza border is a warning to Tel Aviv's hardline leaders that Cairo will deal with any provocative actions on the borders. The Egyptian officials have repeatedly warned against the escalation of tensions on their borders and are against any security changes and displacement of Palestinians from Gaza, as this action seriously threatens Egypt's territorial integrity.
Also, the Saudi Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying that the Arab kingdom categorically condemns the Israeli stances on the corridor with Egypt and stand with Cairo against these Israeli position.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Iraq issued a statement and emphasized that Iraq strongly condemns the claims of the occupying regime about the Philadelphi Corridor that are meant for failure the ceasefire efforts in Gaza and rejects the Israeli push to distort the reality and mislead the world community through lies about Gaza border with Egypt.
Also, Kuwait for its part issued a statement offering solidarity with Egypt, saying that it stands with Egypt and calls for end of Israeli violations and crimes.
Oman was next to condemn the Israeli stance, saying that it stands with Cairo against Tel Aviv.
Qatar was another Arab country to react, holding that Netanyahu claims are meant to mislead public and set up roadblocks ahead of mediators seeking to reach a ceasefire. Qatari Foreign Ministry added that the Israeli fabrications have led to destruction of opportunities of peace and expansion of the scipe of violence. Doha also called for strengthening regional and international efforts to force Israel to end its crimes against Gaza.
Jordan, too, rejected Netanyahu’s claims about Philadelphi Corridor and maintained that the Israeli PM seeks to set up obstacles ahead of mediators' pro-ceasefire efforts.
Some Arab countries that have been passive about the crimes of the Israeli army in Gaza in the past eleven months and with their silence even encouraged the Israeli regime to commit genocide against Palestinians could not keep silent to Netanyahu’s lies.
The Arab countries know that the new decisions of the hardline Israeli government mean the continuation of the killing of more people in Gaza and the vicious cycle that inflames the tension in the region since the resistance groups have repeatedly warned that as long as the war in Gaza continues, they will not stop their operations in the occupied territories in support of the Palestinian people, and this issue has increased concerns about the expansion of the scope of the war.
Arab countries know that a regional war is not in the interest of any country and they will suffer more than others. In addition to partial support for the Palestinians, the Arab rulers do not consider the continuation of the war in Gaza in their best interest. Because due to the escalation of tensions in the Red Sea, the maritime trade of the Arab monarchies in this region is endangered, and the continuation of the war in Gaza will make this international waterway strained for a long time, and in this case, the commercial interests of the Arabs will also be at stake.
It is not difficult to refute Netanyahu's words about the Philadelphi Corridor, but his words were intended to cover up his real goal, which is to prevent a truce agreement from reached.
There are multiple reasons why Netanyahu has turned army retreat from the border with Egypt into a principal and strategic matter. With his claims, Netanyahu wants to convince the public that the corridor is crucial to Israeli security and exit from it as a recondition for a deal is a big sin and will reopen the tunnels for Hamas re-arming.
The Arab countries know that with these claims Netanyahu is blocking the path to a ceasefire and is seeking to realize his and his friends' political interests.
The Arab countries are aware of the fact that the real intention of the Netanyahu government behind stay in the Philadelphi Corridor is to put pressure on the Palestinians to move to other lands, and therefore they do not want the occupying regime to implement this project. Because the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Gaza residents in Arab countries will create a new crisis for these countries that will be difficult to deal with.
Forced displacement of Gazans is aimed at full occupation of Gaza and a prelude to full occupation of the West Bank and formation of a purely Jewish state, a plan that would inflame further tensions in the region.
On the other hand, some compromising Arab monarchies are worried that continuation of Gaza war will unleash further public criticism to their regimes and undermine their legitimacy. So, the Arab rulers push for a ceasefire to stop genocide in Gaza and mitigate the pressures they are under.
Even Israelis do not believe Netanyahu’s words
Netanyahu is seeking to revive his prominence as the "lord of security" in the occupied territories and that he is the only one committed to taking strict positions in favor of security. He wants to gain more points and compensate for his losses so that he can become the hero and protector of Israel and retain his post, but the Israeli citizens do not believe his fake narrative.
Former PM and current opposition leader Yair Lapid said :"The end of the war is in the interest of Israel, and our concept of security has always been short-term wars." Lapid also stated that "the issue of the corridor is not Netanyahu’s concern, but, rather, the Ben-Gvir-Smotrich Corridor. If Netanyahu withdraws from the Philadelphi Corridor to free the prisoners, I promise him that I will support him to return there later."
Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot, former cabinet members, said that they plan revelations about "lies" of the PM about Philadelphi Corridor. According to the statement published by Gantz's office, Tel Aviv can return to the corridor whenever necessary, but the time for saving the prisoners is running out.
In recent weeks, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant voiced his opposition to the army staying in the Philadelphi Corridor. Gallant and representatives of defense ministry said in the recent meeting of the War Cabinet that there is no need for the army to remain on the border with Egypt within the framework of the prisoner swap agreement and that it is possible to provide a security response without deploying troops in this area. The heads of the security agencies believe that Israel is at a strategic crossroads and staying in Philadelphia is not significant.
Gallant and the Chief of General Staff Herzi Halevi who are
at the heart of the war see continuation of battle with resistance
groups not in the interest of Tel Aviv, because they think that the
reserve forces are exhausted and the plan to destroy Hamas that is
sought by hardline ministers is unrealizable. Security officials think
that longer war produces nothing but more losses and costs, and so they
are trying to convince Netanyahu about consequence of his warmongering.
/129