Egypt’s Rafah crossing remains the only exit for
Palestinians in Gaza, making it a critical humanitarian lifeline amid ongoing
conflict. Egypt firmly rejects allegations that it employs the crossing as a
geopolitical tool, citing pressing national security concerns and its unique
position in the region.
Egypt’s Rafah Crossing Stands at the Epicentre of Gaza’s Humanitarian Crisis
As violence and blockade cripple Gaza, the Rafah crossing—Egypt’s narrow land connection with the territory—has been thrust into the international spotlight. While some critics and social media voices accuse Egypt of leveraging the crossing as a means of pressure, Egyptian officials fiercely maintain its role as a passage for humanitarian relief, not a tool of war or extortion.Only Gateway Outside Israeli Control
As reported by the editorial team at Egyptian Gazette, voices on social media alleging that,
“Egypt is responsible for starving Palestinians in Gaza,”
have drawn fierce rebuke. The Gazette clarifies,
“This claim grossly distorts the reality. The Rafah Crossing … has always been a lifeline, and Egypt’s management reflects this spirit”.
According to L'Orient Today, the Rafah crossing represents
“the only point of connection between the Gaza Strip and Egyptian territory, more precisely the Sinai Peninsula”.
Journalist Nael Shama, writing for L'Orient Today, explains,
“It is currently under the control of Egyptian authorities, in particular their intelligence services.”
This crossing
“is strictly reserved for the transit of people and does not allow the transport of goods,”
a decision rooted in the legacy of Israeli
withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 and subsequent agreements aimed at preventing
Gaza’s humanitarian dependency on Egypt alone .
Blockade and Vital Aid Access
As highlighted by Ahmed Moustafa in The Conversation, the Rafah crossing is the only border Gaza has not directly administered by Israel, describing it as “vital to the survival of Gazans.” Moustafa notes,
“Since the 2007 blockade, the Gaza Strip has effectively been an open-air prison,”
amplifying Rafah’s importance as
“one of the few access points for the movement of people, goods, and humanitarian aid”.
As further reported by Middle East Eye, Cairo has
“tightly controlled [the crossing] for years, limiting how long it's kept open down to as few as 32 days in a single year at some points... as part of the Israeli-led blockade on Gaza imposed since 2007”.
The reporter details that
“the first aid convoy, comprising 20 trucks, finally entered on 21 October—13 days after the start of the assault,”
underlining the administrative and logistical
bottlenecks driven by both Israeli and Egyptian policies.
What Is Egypt’s Official Stance on the Rafah Crossing?
Egyptian Gazette underscores that the country’s approach is governed chiefly by “national security imperatives.” Tamer El Shihawy, quoted by Jewish Voice for Labour, said,
“Letting thousands of unknown people cross the Sinai—one of the most sensitive and militarised zones in the region—is a red line. We don’t know who they are, what they’re carrying, or what ideology they may have. This is a matter of national security”.
According to L'Orient Today, Egypt’s foreign minister, Sameh Shoukry, has reiterated these concerns, stating that Egypt
“does not want to face an indefinite refugee crisis”
and pointing to instability in Sinai, where
“a group of Egyptian nationals recently formed… and pledged allegiance to the Islamic State terrorist group”.
The underlying fear: an
uncontrolled influx could heighten regional tensions, especially given the
Sinai’s history with insurgency.
Humanitarian Aid and Diplomatic Stalemate
Reuters succinctly states,
“Throughout the seven-month conflict, Rafah, the only crossing not run by Israel, has been a lifeline to the outside world for Palestinians”.
However, as detailed in Middle East Eye, Egyptian authorities have often cited Israeli air raids and the destruction of the crossing itself as obstacles to aid flows:
“Aid trucks slated for entry into Gaza via Rafah have to first drive for a distance of more than 100km to the Nitzana crossing between Egypt and Israel for security screening, then return to Rafah for another check before entering Gaza”.
Cindy
McCain, Executive Director of the UN World Food Programme, called these inspection
conditions “insane,” highlighting delays in much-needed humanitarian
deliveries.
Political Complexity and International Pressure
PBS NewsHour provided perspective from talks over the so-called Philadelphi Corridor, a narrow buffer strip on Gaza’s border with Egypt. Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, have cited the corridor as providing “oxygen for Hamas” by enabling tunnel-based smuggling of arms into Gaza. Egyptian officials sharply rejected the assertion, and according to PBS,
“say they destroyed hundreds of tunnels on its side of the border years ago and set up a military buffer zone.”
Egypt maintains that
“any Israeli presence along the Gaza side of its border would threaten the decades-old peace, a cornerstone of regional stability”.
Blockade Enforcement and Civil Society Obstacles
Reporting for Jewish Voice for Labour, civil society convoys seeking access to Gaza via Rafah have faced significant hostility. Egyptian authorities, as quoted by Tamer El Shihawy, argue their actions are “driven by legal and security concerns,” referencing the “extreme political repression” and the precarious security situation in Sinai. Under President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi, Egypt has
“destroyed the tunnels that provided a lifeline to Gaza and have allowed Israeli drones, helicopters and warplanes to carry out a covert air campaign in Sinai”.
Middle East Eye highlights persistent public
suspicion that Egypt acts in concert with Israel, a view fuelled by Egypt’s
ongoing participation in the blockade. The crossing’s unpredictable opening has
caused frustration and anguish for many Gazans, reinforcing narratives of Egypt
as both gatekeeper and enforcer.
Ceasefire Obstacles and Diplomatic Negotiations
As explored by PBS NewsHour, Egypt’s status as mediator in Israel-Hamas negotiations is complicated by its shared border and security obligations.
“Egypt, which has served as a key mediator, is also opposed to any Israeli presence along the Gaza side of its border and says it would threaten the decades-old peace, a cornerstone of regional stability,”
PBS
observed. Critics have suggested the corridor’s control should lie in
international hands to prevent it being held hostage to national interests.
A Humanitarian Corridor or Strategic Pawn?
Ahmed Moustafa in The Conversation encapsulates the Rafah crossing’s dichotomy, saying,
“It allows Palestinians to maintain vital connections with the outside world and access essential resources. Its operation plays a pivotal role in easing the hardships faced by Gazans”.
Yet
its intermittent closure—prompted by military, political, and security
pressures—fuels arguments that the crossing may inadvertently serve as
bargaining leverage.
Key Statements from the Ground
- Nael
Shama (L'Orient Today): “This is the one and only lifeline for
Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip, while water, gas, electricity and
humanitarian aid have been cut off from the territory due to the complete
blockade imposed by Israel.”
- Sameh
Shoukry (quoted by L'Orient Today): Egyptian authorities are
resolute: “Egypt does not want to face an indefinite refugee crisis” and
will “open Rafah to allow humanitarian aid to enter the Gaza Strip” but
“not to facilitate mass displacement.”
- Cindy
McCain (via Middle East Eye): Called Israeli security
requirements for aid “insane,” echoing widespread frustration among
international organisations faced with severe logistical hurdles.
- Tamer
El Shihawy (Jewish Voice for Labour): “Letting thousands of unknown
people cross the Sinai—one of the most sensitive and militarised zones in
the region—is a red line.”
The Rafah crossing remains a symbol of hope for besieged Gazans and a touchstone of Egyptian sovereignty. While international criticism rises over delays and closures, Egyptian officials insist that robust security imperatives drive all decisions. The question remains whether Rafah can be maintained as an authentic humanitarian “lifeline” or whether it will become, yet again, subject to the strategic calculus of a broader, brutal conflict.