Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly told Defense Minister Yoav Gallant that he was prioritizing his stance of maintaining Israeli troops in the Philadelphi Corridor over saving the lives of the remaining hostages in Gaza.

The stance was shared during a heated security cabinet meeting Thursday night during which the premier had the top ministerial body vote to approve a series of maps drawn up by the IDF, which show how Israel aims to keep its troops deployed in the nine-mile narrow stretch known as the Philadelphi Corridor during the first phase of the ceasefire being negotiated.

It was the latest representation of the divide between Netanyahu and the security establishment, which has pushed for more compromise in the negotiations, particularly regarding the Philadelphi Corridor, fearing that the premier’s hardline positions could scuttle a deal.

According to a transcript from the meeting leaked to Channel 12 on Friday, the ministers had not been briefed ahead of time that they would be holding a vote on the IDF maps and Gallant demanded to know why it was necessary.

“The significance of this is that Hamas won’t agree to it, so there won’t be an agreement and there won’t be any hostages released,” Gallant told the ministers.

Netanyahu replied: “This is the decision.”

Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer then pushed to proceed with a vote on the maps that the IDF presented last week to mediators in Cairo, but Gallant claimed that Netanyahu had imposed his position on the security establishment and that the maps the IDF presented went against its stance.

“I imposed? I imposed?” Netanyahu responded.

“Of course you did. They had their own plan. You are running the negotiations by yourself ever since the war cabinet disbanded (in June). We learn of decisions only after the fact. The negotiators sketched the maps as you wanted, but they had a different position,” Gallant said.

Netanyahu then banged his hands on the table, demanding an immediate vote on his Philadelphi maps.

IDF Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi piped in to raise his own concerns about the prime minister’s strategy: “The IDF will know how to enter and return to the Philadelphi Corridor at the end of the first six weeks of the ceasefire. There are enough constraints in the talks, you don’t need to add another.”

“There is no logic to this vote right now. In any case, the negotiations are currently focused on (other issues) and not the Philadelphi Corridor,” added Mossad spy agency director David Barnea, who has led the Israeli negotiating team.

Gallant then told the cabinet they faced a choice: to remain in the corridor or to return the hostages.

“You are deciding to stay in the Philadelphi Corridor. Is this logical to you? There are living (hostages) there!” Gallant said.

Dermer replied, “The prime minister can do as he likes,” to which Gallant responded, “The prime minister can indeed make all the decisions, and he can also decide to kill all the hostages.”

At this point, other ministers in the room called out Gallant for speaking to the prime minister in such a manner.

Gallant then told Netanyahu he would eventually cave to Sinwar’s demands anyway.

Netanyahu shot back that he doesn’t take directions from anyone.

Gallant accused the cabinet of abandoning the hostages by making the decision, adding he would vote against the measure.

He again turned to the premier and asked, if he had to decide between withdrawing from the Philadelphi Corridor or bringing back the hostage, which would he choose.

Netanyahu stressed that only a determined negotiating stance would bring back the hostages.

Pressed again on the question by Gallant, the prime minister said he was choosing to remain in the Philadelphi Corridor.

Gallant went on to acknowledge that he had lost the argument this time, but he predicted that the ministers would come around to his position.

“Hopefully it will happen sooner rather than later,” the defense minister said.

An unnamed cabinet minister told Ynet that unlike in previous arguments between the pair, nobody came to Gallant’s defense on Thursday night, believing he had gone too far in his criticism.

“This was the most intense argument I can recall between Netanyahu and Gallant,” one of the ministers said. “Netanyahu isolated Gallant completely. In situations such as these, a defense minister may as well lay down his keys.״

The eight-to-one vote, with one abstention, appeared symbolic and largely aimed at further broadcasting Israel’s stance on the Philadelphi Corridor, since the maps had already been submitted to Hamas and mediators Egypt, the US and Qatar.

Far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir cast the vote’s lone abstention. A source close to Ben Gvir was cited by Hebrew media as explaining this was because the proposal included a gradual decrease in the number of soldiers in case of a deal, while he supports maintaining a full military presence at the corridor and in all of Gaza.

The maps have already been adopted by the US, an official from the Prime Minister’s Office said last night, apparently referencing the “bridging proposal” that the White House submitted earlier this month.

The Israel Hayom daily reported Friday that the decision’s content in practice calls for the IDF to gradually thin its presence along the corridor during the first six-week stage of a potential hostage-ceasefire deal, by the end of which only soldiers in watchtowers will be left along the Philadelphi Corridor.

The Israeli presence along the corridor is currently only part of the first stage of the deal. It is expected that if a deal reaches a second stage, it will be demanded of Israel to retreat its presence from the area entirely, the report said.

A senior official told the daily that even as the IDF presence is diminished, Israel will maintain effective control of the corridor, adding that the gradual retreat will only begin once the military has destroyed all the cross-border tunnels in the area and placed sensors that can detect construction of new tunnels.

“In any case, approaching the perimeter will be forbidden,” the official told Israel Hayom. “There’s no need for an IDF division and a half to be on the ground all the time. There will be soldiers and Israeli movement across its whole width all the time, whether for operational needs or logistical needs. The Israeli control will be substantial and not only symbolic.”

Netanyahu has insisted that remaining in the Philadelphi Corridor is essential for preventing continued weapons smuggling, which would allow for the revival of Hamas after the war. This is despite the demand not being included in a previous Israeli proposal issued on May 27.

The US has urged Israel to compromise on the issue, while also offering a bridging proposal that allows for a limited number of soldiers to remain in the corridor, which both Hamas and mediator Egypt have to date opposed, two Arab officials told The Times of Israel earlier this week.

According to the officials, the bridging proposal over-catered to Israel’s demands and it has since been adopted.

The security establishment has pushed the government for more flexibility on the Philadelphi issue, fearing Netanyahu’s stance will further drag out the talks, risking the lives of the hostages, and arguing that Israel would be able to return to the corridor if need be.

Channel 12 news reported Thursday that at the meeting in which the vote was eventually held, Gallant presented a document presenting the security establishment’s opinion that without a hostages-for-ceasefire deal, Israel faced “imminent deterioration into a multifront war.”

According to the senior Prime Minister’s Office official who reported the vote’s results, Netanyahu told ministers during the meeting that Hamas had been able to carry out its October 7 onslaught because Israel didn’t have control over the Philadelphi Corridor.

Netanyahu stressed that by maintaining control over the corridor, Israel will prevent another attack of that nature from unfolding since Hamas won’t be able to re-arm itself.

He also argued that this stance will make a hostage deal more likely because Hamas will see that it has no other choice but to compromise on this issue, just as it did when it agreed to forgo its demand for a permanent end to the war.

In the proposal Hamas submitted earlier this month, the terror group agreed to only have a six-week ceasefire, during which the sides would negotiate the terms of subsequent phases. While the offer envisions the mediators keeping Israel and Hamas at the table, it does appear to provide Israel with the ability to resume fighting if Hamas is deemed to be violating the terms of the deal and not negotiating in good faith.