Six-Day War - June 5-June 10, 1967

June 5- June 10, 1967

“We shall not enter Palestine with its soil covered in sand. We shall enter it with its soil saturated in blood.”

Egypt’s President Gamal Nasser

Introduction:

The perceived change in American foreign policy toward Israel by President Obama (enunciated by his strong recommendation on May 19, 2011 that Israel use the 1967 borders as the basis for a negotiated settlement of the Palestinians problem) reawakened my desire to discuss the Six-Day War.

I will discuss the war from several different perspectives:

The two disparate visions that emanated from the Israeli victory

The six-day war

Today’s legacy

From the perspective of a Zionist, the Six-Day War evokes two starkly different perspectives. On the one hand, Israel’s victory in the Six-Day War is a source of unremitting pride. Her stupendous victory is comparable or exceeds any of the greatest military campaigns in world history. In six days, Israel annihilated the military striking capacity of at least 11 Arab nations—Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Lebanon, Libya, Kuwait, Algeria, Tunisia and Iraq. For those old enough to remember, it made David’s victory over Goliath seem like warm up practice, a precursor to the main event.

On the other hand, the Six-Day War has possibly sown the seeds of Israel’s destruction. The pain of defeat among possibly hundreds of millions of Arabs has resonated into an undying hatred of this western, modern, Jewish State. The ultimate reach of this venom appears boundless. Rather than solace, Israel’s extraordinary victory has left it a political pariah. With the exception of the United States, almost every other nation has embraced Arab calls for Israel returning to its militarily untenable pre-1967 borders. An Israel shrunk down to its pre-1967 borders would become as military vulnerable as Czechoslovakia following Munich Pact.

To expect Israel within fifty years to relinquish all the fruits of its victory given that the Arab nations instigated the war would require unprecedented largesse. That is, America would never consider relinquishing Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and California to Mexico. The Soviet Union would haughtily reject giving up the Polish lands it annexed in 1939. Great Britain sent troops half way across the world to wrestle the Falkland Islands back from its acquisitive neighbor Argentina. Britain’s holding on to the six northern provinces of Ireland represent a visible reminder of the ancient recriminations between Catholics and Protestants.

What were the major factors that led to the Six-Day War?

From early 1965 to the Six-Day War in June 1967, the Palestinian Liberation Organization pursued a consistent policy of border attacks, particularly along the Jordanian, Syrian and Lebanese borders. They used sabotage to force Israel to adopt an offensive position, which in turn forced the Arabs to step up their military preparedness. This cycle of action-retaliation-reaction would lead to a gradual escalation of tension on the borders, and eventually to the Six Day War in 1967. Syria’s attacks on Israeli kibbutzim from the Golan Heights provoked a retaliatory strike on April 7, 1967, during which Israeli planes shot down six Syrian MiGs. Israel followed up by re-introducing military forces to the DMZ. On May 15, Israel’s 19th Independence Day, Egyptian troops began moving into the Sinai and massing near the Israeli border. By May 18, Syrian troops were prepared for battle along the Golan Heights.On May 30, Jordan and Egypt signed a defense pact. The noose was tightening around Israel’s neck.

Highlights of the Six-Day War

On June 5th, Israel surrounded by enemies decided to take pre-emptive action against its enemies to prevent annihilation. Israel launched Operation Focus, a large-scale surprise air strike which annihilated the Egyptian air force. This was the opening of the Six-Day War. The outcome was a swift and decisive Israeli victory. Israel took effective control of the Gaza Strip and the Sinai Peninsula from Egypt, the West Bank and East Jerusalem from Jordan, and the Golan Heights from Syria.

Long Term impact of Israel’s victory

The status of the territories captured by Israel during the war and the concurrent refugee problem are central concerns in the ongoing Israeli–Palestinian conflict, raising issues in international law, and having far-reaching consequences in global affairs. Specifically since 1948 between 500,000 and 1 million former residents of Palestine now live outside of Israel in “temporary” housing in Jordon, the West Bank, Syria, and Lebanon. Their dire straits remain a human tragedy. Unfortunately, the unwillingness of their Arab hosts to let these people integrate within their countries and become full-fledged citizens has exacerbated the problem. Almost universally Arab politicians demand the “right of return” of these Palestinian refugees to Israel, knowing full well that these Palestinians would maintain their struggle against the hated Zionist state.

In return Israel retains control of the Golan Heights bordering Syria and the West Bank. The West Bank is a landlocked area roughly the size of the state of Delaware. It is west of the Jordon River. To the west, north, and south, the West Bank shares borders with the state of Israel. To the east, across the Jordan River, lies the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Population 2.6 million: 75% Muslim; 18% Jewish, 7% Christian.

Threat of Isolation

Obama warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Israel must face hard realities of being isolated if they cannot make a peace agreement with the Palestinians. Obama’s admonition failed to convey that with the possible exception of America, Israel cannot realistically expect diplomatic or military support from any other source. It is a pariah state. In a nutshell, the Jewish desire for a homeland has led to an establishment of a nation that is an anathema to its neighbors. Brett Stephens of the Wall Street Journal pointed out that the International Diplomatic Community walked out on Israel 35 years ago. It is Israel’s formidable technological prowess that makes it a desirable business partner with all the key players.

Obama’s counsel that Palestinians and Israelis must mutually agree on any land swap has no realistic chance for agreement. Israel is unwilling to return to the 1967 borders where at its narrowest point the country was only 9 miles wide. Furthermore, Israel is committed to a united Jerusalem under Israeli control. For thousands of years Jerusalem has been its religious focal point, its holiest city. Jerusalem has been the ancestral and spiritual homeland of the Jewish people since the 10th century BCE. By 1840, the Jewish community constituted the largest single religious group in the city and from the 1880s onward constituted the majority within the city. To emphasize my point, Jews living outside Jerusalem pray facing its direction. Jerusalem is mentioned in the Torah 700 times, it is not mentioned in the Koran once!

Since 1967 650,000 Israelis, close to 12% of its population, live in territory outside the 1967 borders. Most of them live in suburbs of either Jerusalem or Tel Aviv. Forcibly relocating its citizens to the pre-1967 borders is not feasible. Alternatively, Israel occupies less than 1% of the territory held by all the Arab states.

Recent hostile moves by Egypt undermine the notion that Israel has gained permanent peace with her in return for land. Under the Camp David Accords (1978) Israel gave up large territory in Sinai and returned Egypt’s Abu-Rudeis oil fields in western Sinai, which contained long term, commercially productive wells. Despite Israel’s sacrifices, Egypt recently orchestrated a reconciliation of Hamas and the PLO.

The Israel withdrawal from Gaza has created a hostile state on its borders from which countless rockets have been launched against her. Gaza’s current ruling party, Hamas, explicitly does not recognize the legitimacy of Israel. The European Union, the United States, Canada, and Japan classify Hamas as a terrorist organization.

Israel’s Historic Isolation

Israel was similarly isolated during the time period of the Six-Day War. Hundreds of millions of Arabs were committed to annihilating the Jewish State. The terminology of their leaders that they would drive the Jews into the sea was a mission statement and not merely rhetoric. Alternatively, no leader of any country provided any verbal hint that they were prepared to intervene to prevent Israel’s destruction. The following events are illustrative:

The United Nations in May 1967 withdrew their forces stationed in Egypt under Egyptian pressure. Without bringing the matter to the attention of the General Assembly, as his predecessor had promised, Secretary-General U Thant complied with the Egyptian demand.The removal of these UN troops was a key catalyst that culminated in the Six-Day War. The UN troops had prevented the outbreak of hostilities between Israel and Egypt since the 1956 Sinai Campaign. Furthermore, the UN force was supposed to safeguard Israel from Egypt again closing the Straits of Tiran or launching terrorist attacks from that quarter. Closing the Straits of Tiran to Israel fatally undermined Israel’s economy. This blockade cut off Israel’s only supply route with Asia and stopped the flow of oil from its main supplier, Iran.

In 1967, Charles De Gaulle, the President of France, declined Israel’s request for purchases of Mirage Jets. Until then France had been Israel’s largest supplier of sophisticated weapons and served as a key partner in the creation of Israel’s nuclear capability. De Gaulle “threw Israel under the bus” despite the latter’s unflinching support of France during the Suez War.

America, contrary to Eisenhower’s pledge, failed to enforce Israel’s right of passage in the Suez Canal.

On May 13, 1967 a Soviet parliamentary delegation visited Cairo and informed the Egyptian leaders that Israel had concentrated eleven to thirteen brigades along the Syrian border in preparation for an assault within a few days, with the intention of overthrowing the revolutionary Syrian Government. This was a complete fabrication designed by the Soviets to destabilize the Middle East. Nasser probably correctly interpreted the Soviet information as an indication to him that the time was ripe for an attack on Israel and that he had their backing. With the United States deeply distracted by the War in Vietnam, the Soviets had reason to think there would be no US intervention. Nasser then abandoned his former cautious policy and took the lead for new aggression against Israel. Syria and Iraq eagerly joined Egypt’s preparations, increasing the momentum toward war.

Not one country or the United Nations urged moderation. They did not seriously object to the Arab bloc’s threat to destroy Israel. In a nutshell, the elimination of Israel, a legitimate member of the United Nations, was not viewed as a grave violation of the existing political order and a gross violation of the UN charter.

Egypt’s President Gamal Nasser succinctly expressed the Arabs’ goal

“.. the full restoration of the rights of the Palestinian people. In other words, we aim at the destruction of the State of Israel. The immediate aim: perfection of Arab military might. The national aim: the eradication of Israel.”

Other Arab leaders from Syria, Jordan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Lebanon, Libya, Kuwait, Algeria, Tunisia and Iraq joined in the rhetoric and preparations for war.

Even after the 1967 War, The UN remains steadfastly anti-Israel. Sadly, an organization created to protect all states large and small has become an instrument of hate and recrimination. United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3379, adopted on November 10, 1975 by a vote of 72 to 35 (with 32 abstentions), “determine[d] that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.” The UN never commended Israel for rescuing 50,000 Ethiopian Jews during Operation Carpet.

Resolution 242

The 1967 War also laid the foundation for future discord in the region – as on November 22, 1967, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 242, the “land for peace” formula, which called for Israeli withdrawal “from territories occupied” in 1967 and “the termination of all claims or states of belligerency.”

Resolution 242 recognized the right of “every state in the area to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.” Israel returned the Sinai to Egypt in 1978, after the Camp David Accords, and disengaged from the Gaza Strip in the summer of 2005, though its army frequently re-enters Gaza for military operations and still retains control of border crossings, seaports and airports.

Jews Exodus from Arab Lands

As many as 500,000 Jews were expelled from Iraq, Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen and Morocco after the creation of the Israeli State. Most of these immigrated to Israel. Nevertheless, the injustice of their expulsion and the cost of their reparation to Israel is a taboo subject.

Alternative to Obama Proposal

I certainly agree that the status quo is not acceptable. That is, the plight of stateless Palestinians is a cancer that threatens peace not only in the Middle East but has become a source of worldwide terrorism. However, it is not a front runner issue (essential to US self-interest) in comparison to emasculating the growing threat of Iran.

It is my contention that monetary compensation could be the backbone for resolving territorial disputes and upgrading the lives of Palestinian refugees. In return for granting Palestinians citizenship in Lebanon, Jordon, and the West Bank the host counties should receive compensation for an indefinite time period. In addition, rather than just providing humanitarian aid to the Palestinian refugees, the developed countries and the wealthy nations of the Middle East should allocate significant resources. The alternative to peace- the outbreak of hostilities in the Middle East- has incalculable costs.

Israel specifically must contribute financially for the territory it currently holds outside the 1967 borders. Israel can afford to write a check, it cannot accept the reestablishment of the 1967 borders.

In regard to the religious sites in Jerusalem sacred to Christians and Muslims, Israel needs to cede control to a third party. Netanyahu specifically said in from of a bi-partisan meeting of U.S. Congress on 5/24 that only under Israeli control have the different religious faiths occupying Jersusalem for the first time in history enjoyed access to their holy sites.

International Guarantees to Israel

The indifference of the world community to the plight of Jews during the holocaust has left a legacy of suspicion both within Israel and the Jews of the diaspora. Moreover, the indifference to Israel’s fate during Her War of Independence (1948), the Six-Day War (1967) and the Yom Kippur War (1973) have hardened Israelis. The refrain “never again” remains a dominant psychological phenomenon that guides her policies. For example, a NATO and UN commitment to Israel’s existence could help allay her fears of abandonment.

Conclusion

I end where I began. To expect Israel to give up substantially all the fruits of her victory during the Six-Day War contravenes historical experience. National self-interest is inherent and remains the cornerstone of international relations.