Per @LahavHarkovs thread, Defense Minister Gallant opposes this posture. My read is he and others in Israel's defense establishment continue to believe they can simply return to Philadelphi after the hostage exchange. I believe they are misreading their international constraints.
It will be at the height of the election season in the U.S. The party that changes the ceasefire status quo is the one that will be under pressure to return to it. Biden will have strong incentives to push on Israel to at least wait.
There are also the Egyptian objections that implicate both the huge bribes they have enjoyed from this smuggling and their peace treaty with Israel that implicitly includes Philadelphi.
Both of these can be overcome with American money.
The biggest challenge to my mind is the actual long term implementation. There is a reason why Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005. It was hoped it would further peace, but more immediately it was deadly for Israeli soldiers at a rate Israel did not accept.
Hamas has been materially diminished in terms of fighting men, materials, and facilities as a result of this current war.
That doesn't mean it and other terrorist militias could not impose costs on Israel for controlling the border in a post-war scenario.
I believe that to prevent Hamas from restoring its capabilities the smuggling has to be greatly diminished. (I'm not sure eliminating it 100% is feasible). The best way to do that is to control the border with Egypt. Whether that is sustainable is an open question.
But that's a problem for Israel to address, not one Israel should have to negotiate with the U.S. on in a way that benefits Hamas. So for the current round of negotiations, it's a good posture *if* it is true that the U.S. is removing this diplomatic objection.
= new reply since forum marked as read