Six-Day War

IDF Paratroopers at Jerusalem's
Western Wall shortly after its capture.
The Six-Day War of June 5-10, 1967 was a war between the
Israeli army and the armies of the neighboring states of
Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. The Arab states of Iraq, Saudi
Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria also contributed
troops and arms. At the war's end, Israel had gained control
of the Sinai Peninsula, the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, East
Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights. The results of the war
affect the geopolitics of the region to this day.
Following numerous border clashes between Israel and its
Arab neighbours, particularly Syria, Egyptian President
Gamal Abdel Nasser expelled the United Nations Emergency
Force (UNEF) from the Sinai Peninsula in May 1967. The
peacekeeping force had been stationed there since 1957,
following a British-French-Israeli invasion of Egypt which
was launched during the Suez Crisis. Egypt amassed 1,000
tanks and nearly 100,000 soldiers on the Israeli border[10]
and closed the Straits of Tiran to all ships flying Israeli
flags or carrying strategic materials, receiving strong
support from other Arab countries. Israel responded with a
similar mobilization that included the call up of 70,000
reservists to augment the regular IDF forces.
On June 5, 1967, Israel launched a surprise attack on
Egypt and Syria. Israel has always considered this a
preemptive attack. This is, however, disputed by Arab
countries, who assert that Israel's strike was an
unwarranted and illegal act of aggression. Jordan, which had
signed a mutual defence treaty with Egypt on May 30, then
attacked western Jerusalem and Netanya.
In Arabic, the war is called (Arabic: حرب الأيام الستة,
Ḥarb al‑Ayyam as‑Sitta or more commonly Arabic: حرب 1967,
Ḥarb 1967. In Hebrew: מלחמת ששת הימים, Milhemet Sheshet Ha‑Yamim).
It is also known as the 1967 Arab-Israeli War, the Third
Arab-Israeli War, Six Days' War, an‑Naksah (The Setback), or
the June War.
Background
Suez Crisis aftermath
The Suez Crisis of 1956 represented a military defeat
but a political victory for Egypt. It was a pivotal event in
the lead up to the Six-Day War. In a victory speech
delivered to the Knesset, David Ben-Gurion said that the
1949 armistice agreement with Egypt was dead and buried, and
that the armistice lines were no longer valid and could not
be restored. Under no circumstances would Israel agree to
the stationing of UN forces on its territory or in any area
it occupied. Heavy diplomatic pressure from both the United
States and the Soviet Union forced Israel into a conditional
withdrawal of its military from the Sinai Peninsula, only
after satisfactory arrangements had been made with the
international force that was about to enter the canal zone.
After the 1956 war, Egypt agreed to the stationing of a
UN peacekeeping force in the Sinai, the United Nations
Emergency Force, to keep that border region demilitarized,
and prevent Palestinian fedayeen guerrillas from crossing
the border into Israel.
Egypt also agreed to reopen the Straits of Tiran to
Israeli shipping, whose closure had been a significant
catalyst in precipitating the Suez Crisis. As a result, the
border between Egypt and Israel remained quiet for a while.
After the 1956 war, the region returned to an uneasy
balance without the resolution of any of the underlying
issues. At the time, no Arab state had recognized Israel.
Syria, aligned with the Soviet bloc, began sponsoring
guerrilla raids on Israel in the early 1960s as part of its
"people's war of liberation", designed to deflect domestic
opposition to the Ba'ath Party. Even after nearly two
decades of its existence, no neighboring Arab country of
Israel was willing to negotiate a peace agreement with
Israel or accept its existence. Tunisian President Habib
Bourgiba suggested in a speech in Jericho in 1965 that the
Arab world should face reality and negotiate with Israel,
but this was rejected by the other Arab countries.
Water dispute
In 1964, Israel began withdrawing water from the
Jordan River for its National Water Carrier. The following
year, the Arab states began construction of the Headwater
Diversion Plan, which, once completed, would divert the
waters of the Banias Stream before the water entered Israel
and the Sea of Galilee, to flow instead into a dam at
Mukhaiba for use by Jordan and Syria, and divert the waters
of the Hasbani into the Litani River, in Lebanon. The
diversion works would have reduced the installed capacity of
Israel's carrier by about 35%, and Israel's overall water
supply by about 11%.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) attacked the diversion
works in Syria in March, May, and August 1965, perpetuating
a prolonged chain of border violence that linked directly to
the events leading to war.
Israel and Jordan
The long border between Jordan and Israel was tense
since the beginning of Fatah's guerrilla operations in
January 1965. While Syria was the main supporter of such
operations, Israel viewed the state from which the raids
were perpetrated as responsible. King Hussein, the Hashemite
ruler, was in a bind: he did not want to appear as
cooperating with Israel in light of the delicate
relationship of his government with the majority Palestinian
population in his kingdom, and his success in preventing
such raids was only partial. In the summer and autumn of
1966 several incidents occurred, involving Israeli civilians
and military personnel. This culminated on 11 November 1966,
when an Israeli border patrol hit a land mine, killing three
soldiers and injuring six others. Israel believed the mine
had been planted by militants from Es Samu, a village in the
southern West Bank, close to where the incident took place,
which was a Fatah stronghold. This led the Israeli cabinet
to approve a large scale operation called `Shredder'. On
November 12, King Hussein of Jordan, fearing Israeli
retaliation, issued a condolence letter to Israel via the
U.S. Embassy, but the U.S ambassador to Israel, Walworth
Barbour, did not deliver it in a timely manner.
On the morning of November 13, the Israel Defense Force
mobilized, crossed the border into the West Bank and
attacked Es Samu. The attacking force consisted of
3,000-4,000 soldiers backed by tanks and aircraft. They were
divided into a reserve force, which remained on the Israeli
side of the border, and two raiding parties, which crossed
into the Jordanian-occupied West Bank.
The larger force of eight Centurion Tanks, followed by
400 paratroopers mounted in 40 open-topped half-tracks and
60 engineers in 10 more half-tracks, headed for Samu; while
a smaller force of three tanks and 100 paratroopers and
engineers in 10 half-tracks headed towards two smaller
villages: Kirbet El-Markas and Kirbet Jimba. According to
Terrence Prittie's Eshkol: The Man and the Nation, 50 houses
were destroyed, but the inhabitants had been evacuated hours
before.
To Israel's surprise, the Jordanian military intervened.
The 48th Infantry Battalion of the Jordanian Army ran into
the Israeli forces northwest of Samu; and two companies
approaching from the northeast were intercepted by the
Israelis, while a platoon of Jordanians armed with two 106
mm recoilless guns entered Samu. The Jordanian Air Force
intervened as well and a Jordanian Hunter fighter was shot
down in the action. In the ensuing battles, three Jordanian
civilians and 15 soldiers were killed; 54 other soldiers and
96 civilians were wounded. The commander of the Israeli
paratroop battalion, Colonel Yoav Shaham, was killed and 10
other Israeli soldiers were wounded.
According to the Israeli government, 50 Jordanians were
killed, but the true number was never disclosed by the
Jordanians, in order to keep up morale and confidence in
King Hussein's regime. The whole battle was short: the
Israeli forces crossed the border at 6:00 A.M. and returned
by 10:00 A.M.
Hussein felt betrayed by the operation. He had been
having secret meetings with Israeli foreign ministers Abba
Eban and Golda Meir for three years. According to him he was
doing everything he could to stop guerrilla attacks from
Jordan. "I told them I could not absorb a serious
retaliatory raid, and they accepted the logic of this and
promised there would never be one".
Two days later, in a memo to U.S. President Lyndon B.
Johnson, his Special Assistant Walt Rostow wrote:
"retaliation is not the point in this case. This 3000-man
raid with tanks and planes was out of all proportion to the
provocation and was aimed at the wrong target," and went on
to describe the damage done to US and Israeli interests:
"They've wrecked a good system of tacit cooperation between
Hussein and the Israelis... They've undercut Hussein. We've
spent $500 million to shore him up as a stabilizing factor
on Israel's longest border and vis-à-vis Syria and Iraq.
Israel's attack increases the pressure on him to
counterattack not only from the more radical Arab
governments and from the Palestinians in Jordan but also
from the Army, which is his main source of support and may
now press for a chance to recoup its Sunday losses...
They've set back progress toward a long term accommodation
with the Arabs... They may have persuaded the Syrians that
Israel didn't dare attack Soviet-protected Syria but could
attack US-backed Jordan with impunity."
The United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution
228 unanimously deploring "the loss of life and heavy damage
to property resulting from the action of the Government of
Israel on 13 November 1966", censuring "Israel for this
large-scale military action in violation of the United
Nations Charter and of the General Armistice Agreement
between Israel and Jordan" and emphasizing "to Israel that
actions of military reprisal cannot be tolerated and that,
if they are repeated, the Security Council will have to
consider further and more effective steps as envisaged in
the Charter to ensure against the repetition of such acts."
Facing a storm of criticism from Jordanians,
Palestinians, and his Arab neighbors for failing to protect
Samu, Hussein ordered a nation-wide mobilization on 20
November. Hussein complained that Egypt had failed to
protect the West Bank, while "hiding behind UNEF skirts";
this accusation may have been a factor in Nasser's decision
to rid his country of the UNEF force on the eve of the six
day war.
The operation was the largest scale one that Israel was
involved with since the Suez Crisis. While the diplomatic
and political developments were not as Israel expected,
following the operation Hussein worked hard to avoid any
further clashes by preventing guerrilla operations from
being launched from within Jordan.
Some view the Samu raid as the beginning of the
escalation in tensions that led to the war. According to
Moshe Shemesh, a historian and former senior intelligence
officer in the IDF, Jordan's military and civilian leaders
estimated that Israel's main objective was conquest of the
West Bank. They felt that Israel was striving to drag all of
the Arab countries into a war. After the Samu raid, these
apprehensions became the deciding factor in Jordan's
decision to participate in the war. King Hussein was
convinced Israel would try to occupy the West Bank whether
Jordan went to war, or not.
Israel and Syria
In addition to sponsoring attacks against Israel[9]
(often through Jordanian territory, much to King Hussein's
chagrin), Syria repeatedly shelled Israeli civilian
communities in north-eastern Galilee from positions on the
Golan Heights, as part of the dispute over control of the
Demilitarized Zones (DMZs), small parcels of land claimed by
both Israel and Syria. Concerning attacks on Israel's
territory, Syria maintained that it could not be held
responsible for the activities of El-Fatah and El-Asefa, nor
for the rise of Palestinian organizations whose stated goal
was to liberate their conquered and occupied territory.
For its part, Israel was harassing Syrian farmers in the
Demilitarized Zone, planting mines, erecting fortifications
and opening fire on Syrian military positions, while Israeli
armored tractors were cultivating land in the Demilitarized
Zone in violation of Article 5 of the Armistice Agreement,
backed by Israeli armed forces illegally placed there. Nine
years later, Moshe Dayan, the Israeli defense minister at
the time of the war, stated in an interview not published
until 1997 that Israeli policy on the Syrian border between
1949 and 1967 consisted of "snatching bits of territory and
holding on to it until the enemy despairs and gives it to
us." About events on the Israeli-Syrian border he said:
After all, I know how at least 80 percent of the clashes
there started. In my opinion, more than 80 percent, but
let's talk about 80 percent. It went this way: We would send
a tractor to plow some area where it wasn't possible to do
anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance
that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn't shoot,
we would tell the tractor to advance farther, until in the
end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we
would use artillery and later the air force also, and that's
how it was. I did that, and Laskov and Czera did that, and
Yitzhak did that, but it seemed to me that the person who
most enjoyed these games was Dado. We thought that we could
change the lines of the ceasefire accords by military
actions that were less than war. That is, to seize some
territory and hold it until the enemy despairs and gives it
to us.
Historian and Israeli ambassador to the United States,
Michael Oren admitted that "There is an element of truth to
Dayan's claim", though he considers the ceasefire violations
justified as "Israel regarded the de-militarized zones in
the north as part of their sovereign territory"
In 1966, Egypt and Syria signed a defense pact whereby
each country would support the other if it were attacked.
According to Indar Jit Rikhye, Egyptian Foreign Minister
Mahmoud Riad told him that the Soviet Union had persuaded
Egypt to enter the pact with two ideas in mind: to reduce
the chances of a punitive attack on Syria by Israel and to
bring the Syrians under Egyptian President Gamal Abdel
Nasser's moderating influence.
During a visit to London in February 1967, Israeli
Foreign Minister Abba Eban briefed journalists on Israel's
"hopes and anxieties" explaining to those present that,
although the governments of Lebanon, Jordan and the United
Arab Republic (Egypt's official name until 1971) seemed to
have decided against active confrontation with Israel, it
remained to be seen whether Syria could maintain a minimal
level of restraint at which hostility was confined to
rhetoric.
On April 7, 1967, a minor border incident escalated into
a full-scale aerial battle over the Golan Heights, resulting
in the loss of six Syrian MiG-21s to Israeli Air Force (IAF)
Dassault Mirage IIIs, and the latter's flight over Damascus.
Tanks, heavy mortars, and artillery were used in various
sections along the 47 mile (76 km) border in what was
described as "a dispute over cultivation rights in the
demilitarized zone south-east of Lake Tiberias." Earlier in
the week, Syria had twice attacked an Israeli tractor
working in the area and when it returned on the morning of 7
April the Syrians opened fire again. The Israelis responded
by sending in armor-plated tractors to continue ploughing,
resulting in further exchanges of fire. Israeli aircraft
dive-bombed Syrian positions with 250 and 500 kg bombs. The
Syrians responded by shelling Israeli border settlements
heavily, and Israeli jets retaliated by bombing the village
of Sqoufiye, destroying around 40 houses in the process. At
15:19 Syrian shells started falling on Kibbutz Gadot; over
300 landed within the kibbutz compound in 40 minutes. The
United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO)
attempted to arrange a ceasefire, but Syria declined to
co-operate unless Israeli agricultural work was halted.
Speaking to a Mapai party meeting in Jerusalem on 11 May
Prime Minister of Israel Levi Eshkol warned that Israel
would not hesitate to use air power on the scale of 7 April
in response to continued border terrorism and on the same
day Israeli envoy Gideon Rafael presented a letter to the
president of the Security Council warning that Israel would
"act in self-defense as circumstances warrant". Writing from
Tel Aviv on 12 May, James Feron reported that some Israeli
leaders had decided to use force against Syria "of
considerable strength but of short duration and limited in
area" and quoted "one qualified observer" who "said it was
highly unlikely that Egypt (then officially called United
Arab Republic), Syria's closest ally in the Arab world,
would enter the hostilities unless the Israeli attack were
extensive". In early May the Israeli cabinet authorized a
limited strike against Syria, but Rabin's renewed demand for
a large-scale strike to discredit or topple the Ba'ath
regime was opposed by Eshkol. BBC journalist Jeremy Bowen
reports:
The toughest threat was reported by the news agency
United Press International (UPI) on 12 May: 'A high Israeli
source said today that Israel would take limited military
action designed to topple the Damascus army regime if Syrian
terrorists continue sabotage raids inside Israel. Military
observers said such an offensive would fall short of all-out
war but would be mounted to deliver a telling blow against
the Syrian government.' In the West as well as the Arab
world the immediate assumption was that the unnamed source
was Rabin and that he was serious. In fact, it was
Brigadier-General Aharon Yariv, the head of military
intelligence, and the story was overwritten. Yariv mentioned
'an all-out invasion of Syria and conquest of Damascus' but
only as the most extreme of a range of possibilities. But
the damage had been done. Tension was so high that most
people, and not just the Arabs, assumed that something much
bigger than usual was being planned against Syria.
Border incidents multiplied and numerous Arab leaders,
both political and military, called for an end to Israeli
reprisals. Egypt, then already trying to seize a central
position in the Arab world under Nasser, accompanied these
declarations with plans to re-militarize the Sinai. Syria
shared these views, although it didn't prepare for an
immediate invasion. The Soviet Union actively backed the
military needs of the Arab states. It was later revealed
that on 13 May a Soviet intelligence report given by Soviet
President Nikolai Podgorny to Egyptian Vice President Anwar
Sadat claimed falsely that Israeli troops were massing along
the Syrian border. In May 1967, Hafez al-Assad, then Syria's
Defense Minister declared: "Our forces are now entirely
ready not only to repulse the aggression, but to initiate
the act of liberation itself, and to explode the Zionist
presence in the Arab homeland. The Syrian Army, with its
finger on the trigger, is united... I, as a military man,
believe that the time has come to enter into a battle of
annihilation."
Removal of U.N. peacekeepers from Egypt
At 10:00 p.m. on 16 May, the commander of United
Nations Emergency Force, General Indar Jit Rikhye, was
handed a letter from General Mohammed Fawzy, Chief of Staff
of the United Arab Republic, reading: "To your information,
I gave my instructions to all U.A.R. armed forces to be
ready for action against Israel, the moment it might carry
out any aggressive action against any Arab country. Due to
these instructions our troops are already concentrated in
Sinai on our eastern border. For the sake of complete
security of all U.N. troops which install OPs along our
borders, I request that you issue your orders to withdraw
all these troops immediately." Rikhye said he would report
to the Secretary-General for instructions.
The UN Secretary-General U Thant attempted to negotiate
with the Egyptian government, but on May 18 the Egyptian
Foreign Minister informed nations with troops in UNEF that
the UNEF mission in Egypt and the Gaza Strip had been
terminated and that they must leave immediately, and
Egyptian forces prevented UNEF troops from entering their
posts. The Governments of India and Yugoslavia decided to
withdraw their troops from UNEF, regardless of the decision
of U Thant. While this was taking place, U Thant suggested
that UNEF be redeployed to the Israeli side of the border,
but Israel refused, arguing that UNEF contingents from
countries hostile to Israel would be more likely to impede
an Israeli response to Egyptian aggression than to stop that
aggression in the first place. The Permanent Representative
of Egypt then informed U Thant that the Egyptian government
had decided to terminate UNEF's presence in the Sinai and
the Gaza Strip, and requested steps that the force withdraw
as soon as possible. On May 19 the UNEF commander was given
the order to withdraw. Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser
then began the re-militarization of the Sinai, and
concentrated tanks and troops on the border with Israel.
The withdrawal of UNEF was to be spaced over a period of
some weeks. The troops were to be withdrawn by air and by
sea from Port Said. The withdrawal plan envisaged that the
last personnel of UNEF would leave the area on 30 June 1967.
On the morning of 27 May, Egypt demanded that the Canadian
contingent be evacuated within 48 hours "on grounds of the
attitude adopted by the Government of Canada in connection
with UNEF and the United Arab Republic Government's request
for its withdrawal, and "to prevent any probable reaction
from the people of the United Arab Republic against the
Canadian Forces in UNEF."" The withdrawal of the Canadian
contingent was accelerated and completed on 31 May, with the
effect that UNEF was left without its logistics and air
support components. In the war itself 15 members of the
remaining force were killed and the rest evacuated through
Israel
Yitzhak Rabin, who served as the Chief of the General
Staff for Israel during the war stated: "I do not believe
that Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent into Sinai
on May 14 would not have been enough to unleash an offensive
against Israel. He knew it and we knew it." Menachem Begin
stated that "The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai
approaches did not prove that Nasser was really about to
attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to
attack him." Former Chief of Staff of the armed
forces, Haim Bar-Lev (a deputy chief during the war) had
stated: "the entrance of the Egyptians into Sinai was not a
casus belli." Major General Mattityahu Peled, the Chief of
Logistics for the Armed Forces during the war, said the
survival argument was "a bluff which was born and developed
only after the war... ..."When we spoke of the war in the
General Staff, we talked of the political ramifications if
we didn't go to war what would happen to Israel in the next
25 years. Never of survival today." Peled also stated
that "To pretend that the Egyptian forces massed on our
frontiers were in a position to threaten the existence of
Israel constitutes an insult not only to the intelligence of
anyone capable of analyzing this sort of situation, but
above all an insult to the Zahal (Israeli military)
The Straits of Tiran
In the spring of 1967, the Soviet Union fed the
Syrian government false information that Israel was planning
to invade Syria; Syrian officials informed the Egyptian
government. On May 22, Egypt responded by announcing, in
addition to the UN withdrawal, that the Straits of Tiran
would be closed to "all ships flying Israeli flags or
carrying strategic materials", with effect from May 23.
The rights of Egypt regarding the Straits of Tiran had
been debated at the General Assembly pursuant to Israel's
withdrawal from the Sinai following the Suez Crisis. A
number of states, including Australia, Canada, Denmark, the
Netherlands, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United
States argued that the Straits were international waters,
and, as such, all vessels had the right of "free and
unhampered passage" through them. India, however, argued
that Egypt was entitled to require foreign ships to obtain
its consent before seeking access to the gulf because its
territorial sea covered the Strait of Tiran. It too
recognized the right of "innocent passage" through such
waters, but argued it was up to the coastal State to decide
which passage was "innocent". Nasser stated, "Under no
circumstances can we permit the Israeli flag to pass through
the Gulf of Aqaba." Most of Israel's commerce used
Mediterranean ports, and, according to John Quigley, no
Israeli-flag vessel had used the port of Eilat for the two
years preceding June 1967. There were ambiguities, however,
about how rigorous the blockade would be, particularly
whether it would apply to non-Israeli flag vessels. Citing
international law, Israel considered the closure of the
straits to be illegal, and it had stated it would consider
such a blockade a casus belli in 1957 when it withdrew from
the Sinai and Gaza. Egypt stated that the Gulf of Aqaba had
always been a national inland waterway subject to the
sovereignty of the only three legitimate littoral States
Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt who had the right to bar
enemy vessels. The representative of the United Arab
Republic further stated that "Israel's claim to have a port
on the Gulf was considered invalid, as Israel was alleged to
have occupied several miles of coastline on the Gulfline,
including Umm Rashrash, in violation of Security Council
resolutions of 1948 and the Egyptian-Israel General
Armistice Agreement."
The Arab states disputed Israel's right of passage
through the Straits, noting they had not signed the
Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone
specifically because of article 16(4) which provided Israel
with that right. To note, state practice and customary
international law that ships of all states have a right of
innocent passage through territorial seas. That Egypt had
consistently granted passage as a matter of state practice
until then suggests that its opinio juris in that regard was
consistent with practice.[80] As well, during the Egyptian
occupation of the Saudi islands of Sanafir and Tiran in
1950, it provided assurances to the US that the military
occupation would not be used to prevent free passage, and
that Egypt recognizes that such free passage is "in
conformity with the international practice and the
recognized principles of international law.". In 1949 the
International Court of Justice held in the Corfu Channel
Case (United Kingdom v. Albania) that where a strait was
overlapped by a territorial sea foreign ships, including
warships, had unsuspendable right of innocent passage
through such straits used for international navigation
between parts of the high seas, but express provision for
innocent passage through straits within the territorial sea
of a foreign state was not codified until the 1958
Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone.
In the UN General Assembly debates after the war, the
Arab states and their supporters argued that even if
international law gave Israel the right of passage, Israel
was not entitled to attack Egypt to assert it because the
closure was not an "armed attack" as defined by Article 51
of the UN Charter. Pursuant to this point, international law
professor John Quigley argues that under the doctrine of
proportionality, Israel would only be entitled to use such
force as would be necessary to secure its right of passage.
Others disagreed: after the 1956 campaign in which Israel
conquered Sharm el-Sheike and opened the blocked Straits, it
was forced to withdraw and return the territory to Egypt. At
the time, members of the international community pledged
that Israel would never again be denied use of the Straits
of Tiran. The French representative to the UN, for example,
announced that an attempt to interfere with free shipping in
the Straits would be against international law, and American
President Dwight Eisenhower went so far as publicly to
recognize that reimposing a blockade in the Straits of Tiran
would be seen as an aggressive act which would oblige Israel
to protect its maritime rights in accordance with Article 51
of the UN Charter. United Nations Secretary-General U Thant
also went to Cairo to help negotiate an agreement to avoid
conflict, but after the closing of the Straits of Tiran,
Israeli Foreign Minister, Abba Eban, contended this was
enough to start the war. Eban said, "From May the 24th
onward, the question who started the war or who fired the
first shot became momentously irrelevant. There is no
difference in civil law between murdering a man by slow
strangulation or killing him by a shot in the head... From
the moment at which the blockade was posed, active
hostilities had commenced, and Israel owed Egypt nothing of
her charger rights." Contrary to this view in a letter
written to the New York Times in June 1967 lawyer Roger
Fisher argued that
The United Arab Republic had a good legal case for
restricting traffic through the Strait of Tiran. First it is
debatable whether international law confers any right of
innocent passage through such a waterway.... {Secondly]... a
right of innocent passage is not a right of free passage for
any cargo at any time. In the words of the Convention on the
Territorial Sea: 'Passage is innocent so long as it is not
prejudicial to the peace, good order, or security of the
coastal state... taking the facts as they were I, as an
international lawyer, would rather defend before the
International Court of Justice the legality of the U.A.R's
action in closing the Strait of Tiran than to argue the
other side of the case...
Israel viewed the closure of the straits with some
alarm[citation needed] and the U.S. and UK were asked to
open the Straits of Tiran, as they guaranteed they would in
1957. Harold Wilson's proposal of an international maritime
force to quell the crisis was adopted by President Johnson,
but received little support, with only Britain and the
Netherlands offering to contribute ships.
Yitzhak Rabin reported that the cabinet was deadlocked
over the issue of the blockade. Interior Minister Moshe Haim
Shapira in particular had pointed out that the Straits had
been closed from 1951 to 1956 without the situation
endangering Israel's security.
In a 30 March 1968 Maariv interview Defense Minister
Moshe Dayan explained: "What do you mean, [the war was]
unavoidable? It was, of course, possible to avoid the war if
the Straits [of Tiran] had stayed closed to Israeli
shipping.
Egypt and Jordan
During May and June the Israeli government had worked
hard to keep Jordan out of any war; it was concerned about
being attacked on multiple fronts, and did not want to have
to deal with the Palestinian population of the West Bank.
However, Jordan's King Hussein got caught up in the wave of
pan-Arab nationalism preceding the war; and so, on May 30,
Jordan signed a mutual defense treaty with Egypt, thereby
joining the military alliance already in place between Egypt
and Syria. The move surprised both Egyptians and foreign
observers, because President Nasser had generally been at
odds with Hussein, calling him an "imperialist lackey" just
days earlier. Nasser said that any differences between him
and Hussein were erased "in one moment" and declared: "Our
basic objective will be the destruction of Israel. The Arab
people want to fight."
At the end of May 1967, Jordanian forces were given to
the command of an Egyptian general, Abdul Munim Riad. On the
same day, Nasser proclaimed: "The armies of Egypt, Jordan
and Syria are poised on the borders of Israel ... to face
the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of
Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This
act will astound the world. Today they will know that the
Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has
arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not
of more declarations." Israel called upon Jordan numerous
times to refrain from hostilities. According to Mutawi,
Hussein was caught on the horns of a galling dilemma: allow
Jordan to be dragged into war and face the brunt of the
Israeli response, or remain neutral and risk full-scale
insurrection among his own people. Army Commander-in-Chief
General Sharif Zaid Ben Shaker warned in a press conference
that "If Jordan does not join the war a civil war will erupt
in Jordan". However, according to Avi Shlaim, Hussein's
actions were prompted by his feelings of Arab nationalism.
On June 3, days before the war, Egypt flew to Amman two
battalions of commandos tasked with infiltrating Israel's
borders and engaging in attacks and bombings so as to draw
IDF into a Jordanian front and ease the pressure on the
Egyptians. Soviet-made artillery and Egyptian military
supplies and crews were also flown to Jordan.
Israel's own sense of concern regarding Jordan's future
role originated in Jordanian control of the West Bank. This
put Arab forces just 17 kilometers from Israel's coast, a
jump-off point from which a well-coordinated tank assault
would likely cut Israel in two within half an hour. Hussein
had doubled the size of Jordan's army in the last decade and
had US training and arms delivered as recently as early
1967, and it was feared that it could be used by other Arab
states as staging grounds for operations against Israel;
thus, attack from the West Bank was always viewed by the
Israeli leadership as a threat to Israel's existence. At the
same time several other Arab states not bordering Israel,
including Iraq, Sudan, Kuwait and Algeria, began mobilizing
their armed forces.
The drift to war
In his speech to Arab trade unionists on May 26,
Nasser announced: "If Israel embarks on an aggression
against Syria or Egypt, the battle against Israel will be a
general one and not confined to one spot on the Syrian or
Egyptian borders. The battle will be a general one and our
basic objective will be to destroy Israel."
Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban wrote in his
autobiography that he found "Nasser's assurance that he did
not plan an armed attack" convincing, adding that "Nasser
did not want war; he wanted victory without war". Writing
from Egypt on 4 June 1967 New York Times journalist James
Reston observed: "Cairo does not want war and it is
certainly not ready for war. But it has already accepted the
possibility, even the likelihood, of war, as if it had lost
control of the situation."
Writing in 2002, American National Public Radio
journalist Mike Shuster expressed a view that was prevalent
in Israel before the war that the country "was surrounded by
Arab states dedicated to its eradication. Egypt was ruled by
Gamal Abdel Nasser, a firebrand nationalist whose army was
the strongest in the Arab Middle East. Syria was governed by
the radical Baathist Party, constantly issuing threats to
push Israel into the sea." With what Israel saw as
provocative acts by Nasser, including the blockade of the
Straits and the mobilization of forces in the Sinai,
creating military and economic pressure, and the United
States temporizing because of its entanglement in the
Vietnam War, Israel's political and military elite came to
feel that preemption was not merely militarily preferable,
but transformative.
Diplomacy and intelligence assessments
The Israeli cabinet met on 23 May and decided to
launch an attack if the Straits of Tiran were not re-opened
by 25 May. Following an approach from United States Under
Secretary of State for Political Affairs Eugene Rostow to
allow time for the negotiation of a nonviolent solution
Israel agreed to a delay of ten days to two weeks. UN
Secretary General, U Thant, visited Cairo for mediation and
recommended a moratorium in the Straits of Tiran and a
renewed diplomatic effort to solve the crisis. Egypt agreed
and Israel rejected these proposals. Nasser's concessions
did not necessarily suggest that he was making a concerted
effort to avoid war. The decision benefited him both
politically and strategically. Agreeing to diplomacy helped
garner international political support. Moreover every delay
gave Egypt time to complete its own military preparations
and coordinate with the other Arabs forces. Also, Israel's
rejection did not necessarily demonstrate a desire for war
so much as it demonstrated the urgency it felt the situation
warranted. Israel felt it could not afford to sustain total
mobilization for long.
The U.S. also tried to mediate, and Nasser agreed to send
his vice-president to Washington to explore a diplomatic
settlement. The meeting did not happen because Israel
launched its offensive. Some analysts suggest that Nasser
took actions aimed at reaping political gains, which he knew
carried a high risk of precipitating military hostilities.
Nasser's willingness to take such risks was based on his
fundamental underestimation of Israel's capacity for
independent and effective military action.
On 25 May 1967, Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban landed
in Washington with instructions to discuss American plans
to re-open the Strait of Tiran As soon as he arrived, he
was given new instructions in a cable from the Israeli
government. The cable said that Israel had learned of an
imminent Egyptian attack, which overshadowed the blockade.
No longer was he to emphasize the strait issue; he was
instructed to inform the highest authorities of this new
threat and to request an official statement from the United
States that an attack on Israel would be viewed as an attack
on the United States. Despite his own skepticism, Eban
followed his instructions during his first meeting with
Secretary Rusk, Under Secretary Rostow, and Assistant
Secretary Lucius Battle. American intelligence experts spent
the night analyzing each of the Israeli claims. On May 26,
Eban met with United States Secretary of State Dean Rusk,
Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, and finally with
President Lyndon B. Johnson. The Americans said their
intelligence sources could not corroborate the Israeli
claim; the Egyptian positions in the Sinai remained
defensive. Eban left the White House distraught. According
to most sources, including those involved, the new
instructions were sent at the instigation of Chief of Staff
Yitzhak Rabin, who was eager to force an American decision;
either Johnson would have to commit to specific American
action then, or Israel would be free to act on its own.
Historian Michael Oren explains his reaction: "Eban was
livid. Unconvinced that Nasser was either determined or even
able to attack, he now saw Israelis inflating the Egyptian
threat - and flaunting their weakness - in order to extract
a pledge that the President, Congress-bound, could never
make. 'An act of momentous irresponsibility... eccentric...'
were his words for the cable, which, he wrote, 'lacked
wisdom, veracity and tactical understanding. Nothing was
right about it'." In a lecture given in 2002, Oren said,
"Johnson sat around with his advisors and said, What if
their intelligence sources are better than ours? Johnson
decided to fire off a Hotline message to his counterpart in
the Kremlin, Alexey Kosygin, in which he said, We've heard
from the Israelis, but we can't corroborate it, that your
proxies in the Middle East, the Egyptians, plan to launch an
attack against Israel in the next 48 hours. If you don't
want to start a global crisis, prevent them from doing
that. At 2:30 a.m. on 27 May, Soviet Ambassador to Egypt
Dimitri Pojidaev knocked on Nasser's door and read him a
personal letter from Kosygin in which he said, We don't
want Egypt to be blamed for starting a war in the Middle
East. If you launch that attack, we cannot support you. `Amer
consulted his sources in the Kremlin, and they corroborated
the substance of Kosygin's message. Despondent, Amer told
the commander of Egypt's air force, Major General Mahmud
Sidqi, that the operation was cancelled." According to then
Egyptian Vice-President Hussein el-Shafei, as soon as Nasser
knew what Amer planned, he cancelled the operation.
On 30 May, Nasser responded to Johnson's request of 11 days
earlier and agreed to send his Vice President, Zakkariya
Muhieddin, to Washington on 7 June to explore a diplomatic
settlement in "precisely the opening the White House had
sought". Secretary of State Rusk was bitterly disappointed
that Israel attacked on 5 June, as he thought he might have
been able to find a diplomatic solution if the meeting had
gone ahead. Historian Michael Oren writes that Rusk was "mad
as hell" and that Johnson later wrote "I have never
concealed my regret that Israel decided to move when it
did".
Within Israel's political leadership, it was decided that
if the US would not act, and if the UN could not act, then
Israel would have to act. On 1 June, Moshe Dayan was made
Israeli Defense Minister, and on 3 June the Johnson
administration gave an ambiguous statement; Israel continued
to prepare for war. Israel's attack against Egypt on June 5
began what would later be dubbed the Six-Day War. According
to Martin van Creveld, the IDF pressed for war: "...the
concept of 'defensible borders' was not even part of the
IDFs own vocabulary. Anyone who will look for it in the
military literature of the time will do so in vain. Instead,
Israel's commanders based their thought on the 1948 war and,
especially, their 1956 triumph over the Egyptians in which,
from then Chief of Staff Dayan down, they had gained their
spurs. When the 1967 crisis broke they felt certain of their
ability to win a 'decisive, quick and elegant' victory, as
one of their number, General Haim Bar Lev, put it, and
pressed the government to start the war as soon as
possible".[109] Some of Israel's political leaders, however,
hoped for a diplomatic solution.
The combatant armies
On the eve of the war, Egypt massed approximately
100,000 of its 160,000 troops in the Sinai, including all of
its seven divisions (four infantry, two armored and one
mechanized), as well as four independent infantry and four
independent armored brigades. No less than a third of them
were veterans of Egypt's intervention into the Yemen Civil
War and another third were reservists. These forces had 950
tanks, 1,100 APCs and more than 1,000 artillery pieces. At
the same time some Egyptian troops (15,000 - 20,000) were
still fighting in Yemen. Nasser's ambivalence about his
goals and objectives was reflected in his orders to the
military. The general staff changed the operational plan
four times in May 1967, each change requiring the
redeployment of troops, with the inevitable toll on both men
and vehicles. Towards the end of May, Nasser finally forbade
the general staff from proceeding with the Qahir ("Victory")
plan, which called for a light infantry screen in the
forward fortifications with the bulk of the forces held back
to conduct a massive counterattack against the main Israeli
advance when identified, and ordered a forward defense of
the Sinai. In the meantime, he continued to take actions
intended to increase the level of mobilization of Egypt,
Syria and Jordan, in order to bring pressure on Israel.
Syria's army had a total strength of 75,000. Jordan's
army had 55,000 troops, including 300 tanks, 250 of which
were US M48 Patton, sizable amounts of M113 APCs, a new
battalion of mechanized infantry, and a paratrooper
battalion trained in the new US-built school. They also had
12 battalions of artillery and six batteries of 81 mm and
120 mm mortars.
Documents captured by the Israelis from various Jordanian
command posts record orders from the end of May for the
Hashemite Brigade to capture Ramot Burj Bir Mai'in in a
night raid, codenamed "Operation Khaled". The aim was to
establish a bridgehead together with positions in Latrun for
an armored capture of Lod and Ramle. The "go" codeword was
Sa'ek and end was Nasser. The Jordanians also planned for
the capture of Motza and Sha'alvim in the strategic
Jerusalem Corridor. Motza was tasked to Infantry Brigade 27
camped near Ma'ale Adummim: "The reserve brigade will
commence a nighttime infiltration onto Motza, will destroy
it to the foundation, and won't leave a remnant or refugee
from among its 800 residents".
100 Iraqi tanks and an infantry division were readied
near the Jordanian border. Two squadrons of
fighter-aircraft, Hawker Hunters and MiG 21 respectively,
were rebased adjacent to the Jordanian border.
The Israeli army had a total strength, including
reservists, of 264,000, though this number could not be
sustained, as the reservists were vital to civilian life.
James Reston, writing in the New York Times on 23 May 1967
noted, "In discipline, training, morale, equipment and
general competence his [Nasser's] army and the other Arab
forces, without the direct assistance of the Soviet Union,
are no match for the Israelis... Even with 50,000 troops and
the best of his generals and air force in Yemen, he has not
been able to work his way in that small and primitive
country, and even his effort to help the Congo rebels was a
flop."
On the evening of June 1, Israeli minister of defense
Moshe Dayan called Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin and the GOC,
Southern Command Brigadier General Yeshayahu Gavish to
present plans against Egypt. Rabin had formulated a plan in
which Southern Command would fight its way to the Gaza Strip
and then hold the territory and its people hostage until
Egypt agreed to reopen the Straits of Tiran; while Gavish
had a more comprehensive plan that called for the
destruction of Egyptian forces in the Sinai. Rabin favored
Gavish's plan, which was then endorsed by Dayan with the
caution that a simultaneous offensive against Syria should
be avoided.
On 2 June, Jordan called up all reserve officers, and the
West Bank commander met with community leaders in Ramallah
to request assistance and cooperation for his troops during
the war, assuring them that "in 3 days we'll be in
Tel-Aviv".
The fighting fronts
Preliminary air attack
Israel's first and most critical move was a surprise
attack on the Egyptian Air Force. Egypt had by far the
largest and the most modern of all the Arab air forces,
consisting of about 450 combat aircraft, all of them
Soviet-built and with a heavy quota of top-of-the line
MiG-21 capable of attaining Mach 2 speed. Initially, both
Egypt and Israel announced that they had been attacked by
the other country.
Of particular concern to the Israelis were the 30 Tu-16
Badger medium bombers, capable of inflicting heavy damage
on Israeli military and civilian centers.[125] On 5 June at
7:45 Israeli time, as civil defense sirens sounded all over
Israel, the Israeli Air Force (IAF) launched Operation Focus
(Moked). All but 12 of its nearly 200 operational jets left
the skies of Israel in a mass attack against Egypt's
airfields. The Egyptian defensive infrastructure was
extremely poor, and no airfields were yet equipped with
armoured bunkers capable of protecting Egypt's warplanes.
The Israeli warplanes headed out over the Mediterranean
before turning toward Egypt. Meanwhile, the Egyptians
hindered their own defense by effectively shutting down
their entire air defense system: they were worried that
rebel Egyptian forces would shoot down the plane carrying
Field Marshal Amer and Lt-Gen. Sidqi Mahmoud, who were en
route from al Maza to Bir Tamada in the Sinai to meet the
commanders of the troops stationed there. In any event, it
did not make a great deal of difference as the Israeli
pilots came in below Egyptian radar cover and well below the
lowest point at which its SA-2 surface-to-air missile
batteries could bring down an aircraft. The Israelis
employed a mixed attack strategy: bombing and strafing runs
against the planes themselves, and tarmac-shredding
penetration bombs dropped on the runways that rendered them
unusable, leaving any undamaged planes unable to take off
and therefore helpless targets for later Israeli waves. The
attack was more successful than expected, catching the
Egyptians by surprise and destroying virtually all of the
Egyptian Air Force on the ground, with few Israeli
casualties. Over 300 Egyptian aircraft were destroyed and
100 Egyptian pilots were killed. Among the Egyptian planes
lost were all 30 Tu-16 bombers, as well as 27 out of 40
Il-28 bombers, 12 Su-7 fighter-bombers, over 90 MiG-21s, 20
MiG-19s, 25 MiG-17 fighters and around 32 assorted transport
planes and helicopters. The Israelis lost 19 planes, mostly
operational losses (mechanical failure, accidents, etc). The
attack guaranteed Israeli air superiority for the rest of
the war.
Before the war, Israeli pilots and ground crews had
trained extensively in rapid refitting of aircraft returning
from sorties, enabling a single aircraft to sortie up to
four times a day (as opposed to the norm in Arab air forces
of one or two sorties per day). This enabled the IAF to send
several attack waves against Egyptian airfields on the first
day of the war, overwhelming the Egyptian Air Force. This
also has contributed to the Arab belief that the IAF was
helped by foreign air forces (see below). The Arab air
forces themselves were aided by pilots from the Pakistan Air
Force, as well as some aircraft from Libya, Algeria,
Morocco, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia to make up for the massive
losses suffered on the first day of the war.
Following the success of the initial attack waves against
the major Egyptian airfields and subsequent air raids,
attacks were carried out that afternoon against Israel by
the Jordanian, Syrian, and Iraqi air forces. Subsequent
attacks against secondary Egyptian airfields as well as
Jordanian, Syrian, and Iraqi fields wiped out most of those
nations' air forces. By the evening of the first day, the
Jordanian air force was wiped out, losing over 20 Hawker
Hunter fighters, as well as six transport aircraft and two
helicopters. The Syrian Air Force lost some 32 MiG 21s, and
23 MiG-15 and MiG-17 fighters, and two Ilyushin Il-28
bombers. A number of Iraqi Air Force aircraft were destroyed
at H3 base in western Iraq by an Israeli airstrike which
included 12 out of 20 MiG-21s, two MiG-17s, five Hunter F6s,
and three Il-28 bombers. A lone Iraqi Tu-16 bomber was shot
down later that day by Israeli anti-aircraft fire while
attempting to bomb Tel Aviv. On the morning of June 6, 1967,
a Lebanese Hunter, one of 12 Lebanon owned, was shot down
over the Lebanon/Israel border by an Israeli Mirage IIIJC
piloted by Uri Even-Nir.
By nightfall, Israel said it destroyed 416 Arab aircraft,
while losing 26 of their own in the first two days of the
war. Israeli aircraft shot down included six out of 72 of
its Mirage IIIC/J fighters, four out of its 24 Super Mystère
fighters, eight out of 60 Mystère IVA ground attack
aircraft, four out of 40 Ouragan ground attack aircraft, and
five out of 25 of its Vautour II medium bombers. The numbers
of Arab aircraft claimed destroyed by Israel were at first
regarded as "greatly exaggerated" by the Western press.
However, the fact that the Egyptian, Jordanian, and other
Arab air forces made practically no appearance for the
remaining days of the conflict proved that the numbers were
most likely authentic. Throughout the war, Israeli aircraft
continued strafing Arab airfield runways to prevent their
return to usability. Meanwhile, Egyptian state-run radio had
reported an Egyptian victory, falsely claiming that 70
Israeli planes had been forced down the first day of
fighting.

Israeli armoured troop unit entering Gaza during the Six-Day
War, June 6, 1967.
Gaza Strip and Sinai Peninsula

Conquest of Sinai. June 5-June 6,
1967; Conquest of Sinai. June 7-June 8, 1967
The Egyptian forces consisted of seven divisions:
four armored, two infantry, and one mechanized infantry.
Overall, Egypt had around 100,000 troops and 900-950 tanks
in the Sinai, backed by 1,100 APCs and 1,000 artillery
pieces. This arrangement was thought to be based on the
Soviet doctrine, where mobile armor units at strategic depth
provide a dynamic defense while infantry units engage in
defensive battles.
Israeli forces concentrated on the border with Egypt
included six armored brigades, one infantry brigade, one
mechanized infantry brigade, three paratrooper brigades and
700 tanks, giving a total of around 70,000 men, who were
organized in three armored divisions. The Israeli plan was
to surprise the Egyptian forces in both timing (the attack
exactly coinciding with the IAF strike on Egyptian
airfields), location (attacking via northern and central
Sinai routes, as opposed to the Egyptian expectations of a
repeat of the 1956 war, when the IDF attacked via the
central and southern routes) and method (using a
combined-force flanking approach, rather than direct tank
assaults).
The northernmost Israeli division, consisting of three
brigades and commanded by Major General Israel Tal, one of
Israel's most prominent armor commanders, advanced slowly
through the Gaza Strip and El-Arish, which were not heavily
protected.
The central division (Maj. Gen. Avraham Yoffe) and the
southern division (Maj. Gen. Ariel Sharon), however, entered
the heavily defended Abu-Ageila-Kusseima region, leading to
what is known as the Battle of Abu-Ageila. Egyptian forces
there included one infantry division (the 2nd), a battalion
of tank destroyers and a tank regiment, formed of Soviet WW2
armor, which included 90 T-34-85 tanks (with 85 mm guns), 22
SU-100 tank destroyers (with 100 mm guns), and about 16,000
men, while the Israelis had a man-power of about 14,000, and
150 post-WW2 tanks including the AMX-13 with 90 mm guns,
Centurions, and Super Shermans (both types with 105 mm
guns).
Sharon initiated an attack, precisely planned,
coordinated and carried out. He sent two of his brigades to
the north of Um-Katef, the first one to break through the
defenses at Abu-Ageila to the south, and the second to block
the road to El-Arish and to encircle Abu-Ageila from the
east. At the same time, a paratrooper force was heliborne to
the rear of the defensive positions and attacked the
Egyptian artillery positions. Although the paratrooper
force's plan quickly fell apart, the confusion sown among
the artillery crews helped to slow but not quite stop
artillery fire. Combined forces of armor, paratroopers,
infantry, artillery and combat engineers then attacked the
Egyptian position from the front, flanks and rear, cutting
the enemy off. The breakthrough battles, which were in sandy
areas and minefields, continued for three and a half days
until Abu-Ageila fell.
Many of the Egyptian units remained intact and could have
tried to prevent the Israelis from reaching the Suez Canal
or engaged in combat in the attempt to reach the canal.
However, when the Egyptian Minister of Defense, Field
Marshal Abdel Hakim Amer heard about the fall of Abu-Ageila,
he panicked and ordered all units in the Sinai to retreat.
This order effectively meant the defeat of Egypt.
Due to the Egyptians' retreat, the Israeli High Command
decided not to pursue the Egyptian units but rather to
bypass and destroy them in the mountainous passes of West
Sinai. Therefore, in the following two days (June 6 and 7),
all three Israeli divisions (Sharon and Tal were reinforced
by an armored brigade each) rushed westwards and reached the
passes. Sharon's division first went southward then westward
to Mitla Pass. It was joined there by parts of Yoffe's
division, while its other units blocked the Gidi Pass. Tal's
units stopped at various points to the length of the Suez
Canal.
Israel's blocking action was only partially successful.
Only the Gidi pass was captured before the Egyptians
approached it, but at other places, Egyptian units managed
to pass through and cross the canal to safety. Nevertheless,
in four days of operations, Israel defeated the largest and
most heavily equipped Arab army, leaving numerous points in
the Sinai littered with hundreds of burning or abandoned
Egyptian vehicles and military equipment.
On June 8, Israel had completed the capture of the Sinai
by sending infantry units to Ras-Sudar on the western coast
of the peninsula. Sharm El-Sheikh, at its southern tip, had
already been taken a day earlier by units of the Israeli
Navy.
Several tactical elements made the swift Israeli advance
possible: first, the complete air superiority of the Israeli
Air Force over its Egyptian counterpart; second, the
determined implementation of an innovative battle plan; and
third, the lack of coordination among Egyptian troops. These
would prove to be decisive elements on Israel's other fronts
as well.
West Bank

The Jordan salient. June 57
Jordan was reluctant to enter the war. Some say[who?]
that Nasser used the obscurity of the first hours of the
conflict to convince Hussein that he was victorious; he
claimed as evidence a radar sighting of a squadron of
Israeli aircraft returning from bombing raids in Egypt which
he said was an Egyptian aircraft en route to attacking
Israel. One of the Jordanian brigades stationed in the West
Bank was sent to the Hebron area in order to link with the
Egyptians. Hussein decided to attack.
Prior to the war, Jordanian forces included 11 brigades
totaling some 55,000 troops, equipped with some 300 modern
Western tanks. Of these, nine brigades (45,000 troops, 270
tanks, 200 artillery pieces) were deployed in the West Bank,
including elite armored 40th, and 2 in the Jordan Valley.
The Arab Legion was a long-term-service, professional army
relatively well-equipped and well-trained. Furthermore,
Israeli post-war briefings said that the Jordanian staff
acted professionally as well, but was always left "half a
step" behind by the Israeli moves. The tiny Royal Jordanian
Air Force consisted of only 24 UK Hawker Hunter fighters.
According to the Israelis, the British-made Hawker Hunter
was essentially on par with the French-built Dassault Mirage
III - the IAF's best plane.
Against Jordan's forces on the West Bank, Israel deployed
about 40,000 troops and 200 tanks (8 brigades). Israeli
Central Command forces consisted of five brigades. The first
two were permanently stationed near Jerusalem and were
called the Jerusalem Brigade and the mechanized Harel
Brigade. Mordechai Gur's 55th paratrooper brigade was
summoned from the Sinai front. An armored brigade was
allocated from the General Staff reserve and advanced toward
Ramallah, capturing Latrun in the process. The 10th armored
brigade was stationed north of the West Bank Region. The
Israeli Northern Command provided a division (3 brigades)
led by Maj. Gen. Elad Peled, which was stationed to the
north of the West Bank, in the Jezreel Valley.
The IDF's strategic plan was to remain on the defensive
along the Jordanian front, to enable focus in the expected
campaign against Egypt. However, on the morning of 5 June,
Jordan began shelling targets in west Jerusalem, Netanya,
and the outskirts of Tel Aviv. The Royal Jordanian Air Force
attacked Israeli airfields. Despite this, both air and
artillery attacks caused little damage, and Israel sent a
message promising not to initiate any action against Jordan
if it stayed out of the war. Hussein replied that it was too
late, "the die was cast". On the evening of June 5, the
Israeli cabinet convened to decide what to do; Yigal Allon
and Menahem Begin argued that this was an opportunity to
take the Old City of Jerusalem, but Eshkol decided to defer
any decision until Moshe Dayan and Yitzhak Rabin could be
consulted. Uzi Narkis made a number of proposals for
military action, including the capture of Latrun, but the
cabinet turned him down. The Israeli military only commenced
action after Jordanian forces made thrusts in the area of
Jerusalem, occupying Government House, used as the
headquarters for the UN observers and a Demilitarized zone
since the 1949 Armistice Agreements, which was seen as a
threat to the security of Jerusalem.
On June 6, Israeli units were scrambled to attack
Jordanian forces in the West Bank. In the afternoon of that
same day, Israeli Air Force (IAF) strikes destroyed the
Royal Jordanian Air Force. By the evening of that day, the
Jerusalem infantry brigade moved south of Jerusalem, while
the mechanized Harel and Gur's paratroopers encircled it
from the north. The reserve paratroop brigade completed the
Jerusalem encirclement in the bloody Battle of Ammunition
Hill. Fearing damage to holy places and having to fight in
built-up areas, Dayan ordered his troops not to go into the
city itself.
On June 7, heavy fighting ensued. The infantry brigade
attacked the fortress at Latrun, capturing it at daybreak,
and advanced through Beit Horon towards Ramallah. The Harel
brigade continued its push to the mountainous area of
northwest Jerusalem, linking the Mount Scopus campus of
Hebrew University with the city of Jerusalem. By the
evening, the brigade arrived in Ramallah. The IAF detected
and destroyed the 60th Jordanian Brigade en route from
Jericho to reinforce Jerusalem.
In the north, one battalion from Peled's division was
sent to check Jordanian defenses in the Jordan Valley. A
brigade belonging to Peled's division captured the western
part of the West Bank, another captured Jenin and the third
(equipped with light French AMX-13s) engaged Jordanian M48
Patton main battle tanks to the east.
Dayan had ordered his troops not to enter Jerusalem;
however, upon hearing that the UN was about to declare a
ceasefire, he changed his mind, and without cabinet
clearance, decided to take the city. Gur's paratroopers
entered the Old City of Jerusalem via the Lion's Gate, and
captured the Western Wall and the Temple Mount. The intense
battle for the Old City was fought mostly by paratroopers,
who had to engage in heavy street fighting. The Israeli high
command had ordered the IDF not to use heavy armor in the
Old City - since this was an area holy to Judaism, the
Israeli government wanted to leave it intact. The Jerusalem
brigade then reinforced the paratroops, and continued to the
south, capturing Judea, Gush Etzion and Hebron. The Harel
brigade proceeded eastward, descending to the Jordan River.
In the West Bank, one of Peled's brigades seized Nablus;
then it joined one of Central Command's armored brigades to
fight the Jordanian forces; as the Jordanians held the
advantage of superior equipment and were equal in numbers to
the Israelis.
Again, the air superiority of the IAF proved paramount as
it immobilized the enemy, leading to its defeat. One of
Peled's brigades joined with its Central Command
counterparts coming from Ramallah, and the remaining two
blocked the Jordan river crossings together with the Central
Command's 10th (the latter crossed the Jordan river into the
East Bank to provide cover for Israeli combat engineers
while they blew the Abdullah and Hussein bridges, but was
quickly pulled back because of American pressure).
No specific decision had been made to capture any other
territories controlled by Jordan. After the Old City was
captured, Dayan told his troops to dig in to hold it. When
an armored brigade commander entered the West Bank on his
own initiative, and stated that he could see Jericho, Dayan
ordered him back. It was only after intelligence reports
indicated that Hussein had withdrawn his forces across the
Jordan River that Dayan ordered his troops to capture the
West Bank. According to Narkis:
First, the Israeli government had no intention of
capturing the West Bank. On the contrary, it was opposed to
it. Second, there was not any provocation on the part of the
IDF. Third, the rein was only loosened when a real threat to
Jerusalem's security emerged. This is truly how things
happened on June 5, although it is difficult to believe. The
end result was something that no one had planned.

Israeli tanks advancing on the Golan Heights during the
Six-Day War between
Arab and Israeli forces, June 10, 1967.
Golan Heights

The Battle of Golan Heights, June
9-10
The Battle of Golan Heights, June 9-10False Egyptian
reports of a crushing victory against the Israeli army and
forecasts that Egyptian artillery would soon be in Tel-Aviv
influenced Syria's willingness to enter the war. Syrian
leadership, however, adopted a more cautious approach, and
instead began shelling and conducting air raids on northern
Israel. When the Israeli Air Force had completed its mission
in Egypt, and turned around to destroy the surprised Syrian
Air Force, Syria understood that the news it had heard from
Egypt of the near-total destruction of the Israeli military
could not have been true. During the evening of June 5,
Israeli air strikes destroyed two-thirds of the Syrian Air
Force, and forced the remaining third to retreat to distant
bases, without playing any further role in the ensuing
warfare. A minor Syrian force tried to capture the water
plant at Tel Dan (the subject of a fierce escalation two
years earlier), Kibbutz Dan, and She'ar Yashuv. Several
Syrian tanks are reported to have sunk in the Jordan River.
In any case, the Syrian command abandoned hopes of a ground
attack, and began a massive shelling of Israeli towns in the
Hula Valley instead.
On June 7 and June 8, a debate had been going on in the
Israeli leadership whether the Golan Heights should be
assailed as well. Military advice was that the attack would
be extremely costly, as it would be an uphill battle against
a strongly fortified enemy. The western side of the Golan
Heights consists of a rock escarpment that rises 500 metres
(1700 ft) from the Sea of Galilee and the Jordan River, and
flows down to a more gently sloping plateau. Moshe Dayan
believed such an operation would yield losses of 30,000 and
opposed it bitterly. Levi Eshkol, on the other hand, was
more open to the possibility of an operation in the Golan
Heights, as was the head of the Northern Command, David
Elazar, whose unbridled enthusiasm for and confidence in the
operation may have eroded Dayan's reluctance. Eventually, as
the situation on the Southern and Central fronts cleared up,
Moshe Dayan became more enthusiastic about the idea, and he
authorized the operation.
The Syrian army consisted of about 75,000 men grouped in
nine brigades, supported by an adequate amount of artillery
and armor. Israeli forces used in combat consisted of two
brigades (one armored led by Albert Mandler and the Golani
Brigade) in the northern part of the front at Givat HaEm,
and another two (infantry and one of Peled's brigades
summoned from Jenin) in the center. The Golan Heights'
unique terrain (mountainous slopes crossed by parallel
streams every several kilometres running east to west), and
the general lack of roads in the area channeled both forces
along east-west axes of movement and restricted the ability
of units to support those on either flank. Thus the Syrians
could move north-south on the plateau itself, and the
Israelis could move north-south at the base of the Golan
escarpment. An advantage Israel possessed was the excellent
intelligence collected by Mossad operative Eli Cohen (who
was captured and executed in Syria in 1965) regarding the
Syrian battle positions. Syria had built extensive defensive
fortifications in depths up to 15 kilometers, comparable to
the Maginot Line.
As opposed to all the other campaigns, IAF was only
partially effective in the Golan because the fixed
fortifications were so effective. However, the Syrian forces
proved unable to put up an effective defense largely because
the officers were poor military leaders and treated their
soldiers poorly; often officers would retreat to escape
danger leaving their men confused and ineffective. By the
evening of 9 June, the four Israeli brigades had broken
through to the plateau, where they could be reinforced and
replaced.
On the next day, June 10, the central and northern groups
joined in a pincer movement on the plateau, but that fell
mainly on empty territory as the Syrian forces fled. Several
units joined by Elad Peled climbed to the Golan from the
south, only to find the positions mostly empty as well.
During the day, the Israeli units stopped after obtaining
manoeuvre room between their positions and a line of
volcanic hills to the west. To the east, the ground terrain
is an open gently sloping plain. This position later became
the cease-fire line known as the "Purple Line".
Time magazine reported: "In an effort to pressure the
United Nations into enforcing a ceasefire, Damascus Radio
undercut its own army by broadcasting the fall of the city
of Quneitra three hours before it actually capitulated. That
premature report of the surrender of their headquarters
destroyed the morale of the Syrian troops left in the Golan
area."
War in the air
During the Six-Day War, the IAF demonstrated the
importance of air superiority during the course of a modern
conflict, especially in a desert theatre. Following the
IAF's preliminary air attack, in which the IAF achieved near
total tactical surprise (only four unarmed Egyptian training
flights were in the air when the strike began , it was able
to thwart and harass what remained of the Arab air forces
and to grant itself air superiority over all fronts; it then
complemented the strategic effect of its initial strike by
carrying out tactical support operations.
In contrast, the Arab air forces never managed to mount
an effective attack. Attacks of Jordanian fighters and Iraqi
Tu-16 bombers into the Israeli rear during the first two
days of the war were not successful and led to the
destruction of the aircraft (several Iraqi and Jordanian
aircraft were shot down, while Jordan's air arm was crippled
in strikes against its air bases).
In 1966, Iraqi Captain Munir Redfa flew his MiG-21F-13 to
Israel. Israel capitalized on this defection by test flying
the defecting aircraft to the maximum, thus giving Israeli
pilots great advantage over their opponents.
On June 6, the second day of the war, King Hussein and
Nasser declared that American and British aircraft took part
in the Israeli attacks. (See False allegations of U.S. and
British combat support below).
War at sea
War at sea was extremely limited. Movements of both
Israeli and Egyptian vessels are known to have been used to
intimidate the other side, but neither side directly engaged
the other at sea. The only moves that yielded any result
were the use of six Israeli frogmen in Alexandria harbor
(they were captured, having sunk a minesweeper), and the
Israeli light boat crews that captured the abandoned town of
Sharm el-Sheikh on the southern tip of the Sinai Peninsula
on June 7.
An Egyptian mine sweeper was sunk in Hurgahda harbour.
The sunken vessel is known as El Mina, which translates as "harbour".
On June 8, USS Liberty, a United States Navy electronic
intelligence vessel sailing 13 nautical miles (24 km) off
Arish (just outside Egypt's territorial waters), was
attacked by Israeli air and sea forces, nearly sinking the
ship and causing heavy casualties. Israel said the attack
was a case of mistaken identity, apologized for the mistake,
and paid restitution to the victims or their families. After
an investigation, the US accepted the explanation that the
incident was friendly fire and the issue was closed by the
exchange of diplomatic notes in 1987.

Moshe Dayan, Yitzhak Rabin, and Uzi Narkiss
at the Lion's Gate, Jerusalem
Conclusion of conflict and post-war
situation
By the 10th of June, Israel had completed its final
offensive in the Golan Heights, and a ceasefire was signed
the day after. Israel had seized the Gaza Strip, the Sinai
Peninsula, the West Bank of the Jordan River (including East
Jerusalem), and the Golan Heights. Overall, Israel's
territory grew by a factor of three, including about one
million Arabs placed under Israel's direct control in the
newly captured territories. Israel's strategic depth grew to
at least 300 kilometers in the south, 60 kilometers in the
east and 20 kilometers of extremely rugged terrain in the
north, a security asset that would prove useful in the 1973
Arab-Israeli War six years later.
The political importance of the 1967 War was immense;
Israel demonstrated that it was not only able, but also
willing, to initiate strategic strikes that could change the
regional balance. Egypt and Syria learned tactical lessons
and would launch an attack in 1973 in an attempt to reclaim
their lost territory.
Speaking three weeks after the war ended, as he accepted
an honorary degree from Hebrew University, Yitzhak Rabin
gave his reasoning behind the success of Israel:
Our airmen, who struck the enemies' planes so accurately
that no one in the world understands how it was done and
people seek technological explanations or secret weapons;
our armored troops who beat the enemy even when their
equipment was inferior to his; our soldiers in all other
branches...who overcame our enemies everywhere, despite the
latter's superior numbers and fortifications-all these
revealed not only coolness and courage in the battle
but...an understanding that only their personal stand
against the greatest dangers would achieve victory for their
country and for their families, and that if victory was not
theirs the alternative was annihilation.
According to Chaim Herzog:
On June 19, 1967, the National Unity Government [of
Israel] voted unanimously to return the Sinai to Egypt and
the Golan Heights to Syria in return for peace agreements.
The Golans would have to be demilitarized and special
arrangement would be negotiated for the Straits of Tiran.
The government also resolved to open negotiations with King
Hussein of Jordan regarding the Eastern border.
The Israeli decision was to be conveyed to the Arab nations
by the United States. The US was informed of the decision,
but not that it was to transmit it. There is no evidence of
receipt from Egypt or Syria, and some historians claim that
they may have never received the offer.
Later, the Khartoum Arab Summit resolved that there would
be "no peace, no recognition and no negotiation with
Israel." However, as Avraham Sela notes, the Khartoum
conference effectively marked a shift in the perception of
the conflict by the Arab states away from one centered on
the question of Israel's legitimacy toward one focusing on
territories and boundaries and this was underpinned on
November 22 when Egypt and Jordan accepted United Nations
Security Council Resolution 242.
The June 19 Israeli cabinet decision did not include the
Gaza Strip, and left open the possibility of Israel
permanently acquiring parts of the West Bank. On June 25-27,
Israel incorporated East Jerusalem together with areas of
the West Bank to the north and south into Jerusalem's new
municipal boundaries.
Yet another aspect of the war touches on the population
of the captured territories: of about one million
Palestinians in the West Bank, 300,000 (according to the
United States Department of State) fled to Jordan, where
they contributed to the growing unrest. The other 600,000
remained. In the Golan Heights, an estimated 80,000 Syrians
fled. Only the inhabitants of East Jerusalem and the Golan
Heights became entitled to receive full Israeli citizenship,
as Israel applied its law, administration and jurisdiction
to these territories in 1967 and 1981 respectively, and the
vast majority in both territories declined to do so. See
also Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Golan Heights. Both
Jordan and Egypt eventually withdrew their claims to the
West Bank and Gaza (the Sinai was returned on the basis of
Camp David Accords of 1978 and the question of the Golan
Heights is still being negotiated with Syria). After Israeli
conquest of these newly acquired 'territories,' a large
settlement effort was launched to secure Israel's permanent
foothold. There are now hundreds of thousands of Israeli
settlers in these territories, though the Israeli
settlements in Gaza were evacuated and destroyed in August
2005 as a part of Israel's unilateral disengagement plan.
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 in return for "the termination
of all claims or states of belligerency."
The framers of Resolution 242 recognized that some
territorial adjustments were likely, and therefore
deliberately did not include words all or the in the
official English language version of the text when referring
to "territories occupied" during the war, although it is
present in other, notably French, Spanish and Russian
versions. It 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.
The aftermath of the war is also of religious
significance. Under Jordanian rule, Jews were effectively
barred from visiting the Western Wall (even though Article
VIII of the 1949 Armistice Agreement provided for Israeli
Jewish access to the Western Wall). Jewish holy sites were
not maintained, and their cemeteries had been desecrated.
After the annexation to Israel, each religious group was
granted administration over its holy sites. Despite the
Temple Mount's importance in Jewish tradition, the al-Aqsa
Mosque is under sole administration of a Muslim Waqf, and
Jews are barred from conducting services there.
Casualties
The Israeli casualties of the war, far from Israel's
heavy pre-war estimates, were actually quite low. Israeli
killed were 983, and 4,517 were wounded. 46 Israeli aircraft
were also destroyed. 15 Israeli soldiers were captured. Over
9,800 Egyptian soldiers were listed as killed, wounded or
missing in action. Jordan lost 700 soldiers killed, with
around 2,500 wounded. Syrian losses are unknown, but are
lower than Jordanian casualties.
Allegations that the IDF killed Egyptian
prisoners
After the war, a national debate ensued in Israel
regarding allegations that soldiers killed unarmed
Egyptians. A few soldiers said that they had witnessed the
execution of unarmed prisoners. Gabby Bron, a journalist for
Yedioth Ahronoth, said he had witnessed the execution of
five Egyptian prisoners. Michael Bar-Zohar said that he had
witnessed the murder of three Egyptian POWs by a cook, and
Meir Pa'il said that he knew of many instances in which
soldiers had killed PoWs or Arab civilians. Uri Milstein, a
controversial military historian, was reported as claiming
that there were many incidents in the 1967 war in which
Egyptian soldiers were killed by Israeli troops after they
had raised their hands in surrender. "It was not an official
policy, but there was an atmosphere that it was okay to do
it," Milstein said. "Some commanders decided to do it;
others refused. But everyone knew about it."[164]
Allegations that Egyptian soldiers fleeing into the desert
were shot were confirmed in reports written after the war.
Israeli historian and journalist Tom Segev, in his book
"1967", quotes one soldier who wrote, "our soldiers were
sent to scout out groups of men fleeing and shoot them. That
was the order, and it was done while they were really trying
to escape".
According to a New York Times report of 21 September
1995, the Egyptian government announced that it had
discovered two shallow mass graves in the Sinai at El Arish
containing the remains of 30 to 60 Egyptian prisoners shot
by Israeli soldiers during the 1967 war. Israel responded by
sending Eli Dayan, a Deputy Foreign Minister, to Egypt to
discuss the matter. During his visit, Dayan offered
compensation to the families of victims, but explained that
Israel was unable to pursue those responsible owing to its
20-year statute of limitations. The Israeli Ambassador to
Cairo, David Sultan, asked to be relieved of his post after
the Egyptian daily Al Shaab said he was personally
responsible for the killing of 100 Egyptian prisoners,
although both the Israeli Embassy and Foreign Ministry
denied the charge and said that it was not even clear that
Sultan had served in the military.
Capt. Milovan Zorc and Miobor Stosic, a military liaison
official, who were members of the Yugoslav Reconnaissance
Battalion that formed part of the 3,400-strong UNEF deployed
as a buffer between Egypt and Israel and witnessed the war,
have cast doubt on claims that Israel executed Egyptian
prisoners of war in the area where they were stationed. They
said that if an Israeli unit had killed some 250 POWs near
the Egyptian town of el-Arish, they would likely have come
to know about it.
Declassified IDF documents show that on 11 June 1967, the
operations branch of the general staff felt it necessary to
issue new orders concerning the treatment of prisoners. The
order read: "Since existing orders are contradictory, here
are binding instructions. a) Soldiers and civilians who give
themselves up are not to be hurt in any way. b) Soldiers and
civilians who carry a weapon and do not surrender will be
killed... Soldiers who are caught disobeying this order by
killing prisoners will be punished severely. Make sure this
order is brought to the attention of all IDF soldiers".
According to Israeli sources, 4,338 Egyptian soldiers
were taken captive by IDF. 11 Israeli soldiers were taken
captive by Egyptian forces. POW exchanges were completed on
23 January 1968.
Combat support
On the second day of the war, Arab state-run media
reported that American and British troops were fighting on
Israel's side. Radio Cairo and the government newspaper Al-Ahram
made a number of claims, among them: that U.S. and British
carrier-based aircraft flew sorties against the Egyptians;
that U.S. aircraft based in Wheelus Air Base-Libya attacked
Egypt; and that American spy satellites provided imagery to
Israel. Mohamed Hassanein Heikal, the chief of Al-Ahram in
the Nasserite period, repeated similar claims at Al Jazeera
channel. Later, Muammar al-Gaddafi's Libyan government
confirmed these claims also only to get a pretext for the
coup that took place on 1 September 1969. Unfortunately, the
governments of United States and Britain made too little
efforts either to confirm or deny these claims. Similar
reports were aired by Radio Damascus and Radio Amman.
Egyptian media even said that King Hussein had personally
seen radar observations showing British aircraft taking off
from aircraft carriers.
Outside of the Arab world claims of American and British
military intervention were not taken seriously. Britain, the
U.S. and Israel denied these allegations. On 8 June,
Egyptian credibility was further damaged when Israel
released an audio recording to the press, which they said
was a radio-telephone conversation intercepted two days
earlier between Nasser and King Hussein of Jordan.
Nasser: ...Shall we include also the United States? Do
you know of this, shall we announce that the U.S. is
cooperating with Israel?
Hussein: Hello. I do not hear, the connection is the
worst - the line between you and the palace of the King from
which the King is speaking is bad.
Nasser: Hello, will we say the U.S. and England or just the
U.S.?
Hussein: The U.S. and England.
Nasser: Does Britain have aircraft carriers?
Hussein: (Answer unintelligible).
Nasser: Good. King Hussein will make an announcement and I
will make an announcement. Thank you... Will his Majesty
make an announcement on the participation of Americans and
the British?
Hussein: (Answer not intelligible).
Nasser: By God, I say that I will make an announcement and
you will make an announcement and we will see to it that the
Syrians will make an announcement that American and British
airplanes are taking part against us from aircraft carriers.
We will issue an announcement, we will stress the matter and
we will drive the point home.
In the immediate aftermath of the war, as the extent of
the Arab military defeat became apparent, Arab leaders
differed on whether to continue to assert that the American
military had assisted the Israeli victory. On 9 June 1967,
Nasser stated in his resignation speech (his resignation was
not accepted):
What is now established is that American and British
aircraft carriers were off the shores of the enemy helping
his war effort. Also, British aircraft raided, in broad
daylight, positions of the Syrian and Egyptian fronts, in
addition to operations by a number of American aircraft
reconnoitering some of our positions... Indeed, it can be
said without exaggeration that the enemy was operating with
an air force three times stronger than his normal force.
King Hussein, however, later denied the allegations of
American military support. On 30 June, he announced in New
York that he was "perfectly satisfied" that "no American
planes took part, or any British planes either". In
September, The New York Times reported that Nasser had
privately assured Arab leaders, gathered in Sudan to discuss
the Khartoum Resolution, that his earlier claims were false.
Nonetheless, these allegations, that the Arabs were
fighting the Americans and British rather than Israel alone,
took hold in the Arab world. As reported by the British
Representative in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, a country at odds
with Egypt as a result of the Yemen war:
President Abdel Nasser's allegation ... is firmly
believed by almost the whole Arab population here who listen
to the radio or read the press ... Our broadcast denials are
little heard and just not believed. The denials we have
issued to the broadcasting service and press have not been
published. Even highly educated persons basically friendly
to us seem convinced that the allegations are true. Senior
foreign ministry officials who received my formal written
and oral denials profess to believe them but nevertheless
appear skeptical. I consider that this allegation has
seriously damaged our reputation in the Arab world more than
anything else and has caused a wave of suspicion or feeling
against us which will persist in some underlying form for
the foreseeable future ... Further denials or attempts at
local publicity by us will not dispel this belief and may
now only exacerbate local feeling since the Arabs are
understandably sensitive to their defeat with a sense of
humiliation and resent self-justification by us who in their
eyes helped their enemy to bring this about.
Well after the end of the war, the Egyptian government
and its newspapers continued to make claims of collusion
between Israel, the United Kingdom and the United States.
These included a series of weekly articles in Al-Ahram,
simultaneously broadcast on Radio Cairo by Mohamed Heikal.
Heikal attempted to uncover the "secrets" of the war. He
presented a blend of facts, documents, and interpretations.
Heikal's conclusion was clear-cut: there was a secret
U.S.-Israeli collusion against Syria and Egypt.
According to Israeli historian Elie Podeh: "All post-1967
[Egyptian] history textbooks repeated the claim that Israel
launched the war with the support of Britain and the United
States. The narrative also established a direct link between
the 1967 war and former imperialist attempts to control the
Arab world, thus portraying Israel as an imperialist stooge.
The repetition of this fabricated story, with only minor
variations, in all history school textbooks means that all
Egyptian schoolchildren have been exposed to, and
indoctrinated with, the collusion story." The following
example comes from the textbook Abdallah Ahmad Hamid al-Qusi,
Al-Wisam fi at-Ta'rikh:
The United States' role: Israel was not (fighting) on its
own in the (1967) war. Hundreds of volunteers, pilots, and
military officers with American scientific spying equipment
of the most advanced type photographed the Egyptian posts
for it (Israel), jammed the Egyptian defense equipment, and
transmitted to it the orders of the Egyptian command.
In Six Days of War, historian Michael Oren argues that
the Arab leadership spread false claims about American
involvement in order to secure Soviet support for the Arab
side. After the war, as the extent of the Israeli victory
became apparent to the Arab public, these claims helped
deflect blame for the defeat away from Nasser and other Arab
leaders. In reaction to these claims, Arab oil-producing
countries announced either an oil embargo on the United
States and Britain or suspended oil exports altogether. Six
Arab countries broke off diplomatic relations with the
United States, and Lebanon withdrew its Ambassador.
A British guidance telegram to Middle East posts
concluded: "The Arabs' reluctance to disbelieve all versions
of the big lie springs in part from a need to believe that
the Israelis could not have defeated them so thoroughly
without outside assistance."
Non-combat support
In a 1993 interview for the Johnson Presidential
Library oral history archives, U.S. Secretary of Defense
Robert McNamara revealed that a carrier battle group, the
U.S. 6th Fleet, on a training exercise near Gibraltar was
re-positioned towards the eastern Mediterranean to be able
to defend Israel. The administration "thought the situation
was so tense in Israel that perhaps the Syrians, fearing
Israel would attack them, or the Russians supporting the
Syrians might wish to redress the balance of power and might
attack Israel". The Soviets learned of this deployment,
which they regarded as offensive in nature, and in a hotline
message from Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin threatened the
United States with war.
The Soviet Union supported its Arab allies. In May 1967,
the Soviets started a surge deployment of their naval forces
into the East Mediterranean. Early in the crisis they began
to shadow the US and British carriers with destroyers and
intelligence collecting vessels. The Soviet naval squadron
in the Mediterranean was sufficiently strong to act as a
major restraint on the U.S. Navy. In a 1983 interview with
the Boston Globe, McNamara said that "We damn near had war".
He said Kosygin was angry that "we had turned around a
carrier in the Mediterranean".
In his book Six Days, veteran BBC journalist Jeremy Bowen
claims that on 4 June 1967, the Israeli ship Miryam left
Felixstowe with cases of machine guns, 105 mm tank shells,
and armored vehicles in "the latest of many consignments of
arms that had been sent secretly to Israel from British and
American reserves since the crisis started" and that
"Israeli transport planes had been running a 'shuttle
service' in and out of RAF Waddington in Lincolnshire".
Bowen claims that Harold Wilson had written to Eshkol saying
that he was glad to help as long as the utmost secrecy was
maintained.
Displaced populations
Arab
In his book Righteous Victims, Israeli "New Historian"
Benny Morris writes:
In three villages southwest of Jerusalem and at Qalqilya,
houses were destroyed "not in battle, but as punishment ...
and in order to chase away the inhabitants ... ---contrary
to government...policy," Dayan wrote in his memoirs. In
Qalqilya, about a third of the homes were razed and about
12,000 inhabitants were evicted, though many then camped out
in the environs. The evictees in both areas were allowed to
stay and later were given cement and tools by the Israeli
authorities to rebuild at least some of their dwellings. But
many thousands of other Palestinians now took to the roads.
Perhaps as many as seventy thousand, mostly from the Jericho
area, fled during the fighting; tens of thousands more left
over the following months. Altogether, about one-quarter of
the population of the West Bank, about 200-250,000 people,
went into exile. ... They simply walked to the Jordan River
crossings and made their way on foot to the East Bank. It is
unclear how many were intimidated or forced out by the
Israeli troops and how many left voluntarily, in panic and
fear. There is some evidence of IDF soldiers going around
with loudspeakers ordering West Bankers to leave their homes
and cross the Jordan. Some left because they had relatives
or sources of livelihood on the East Bank and feared being
permanently cut off. Thousands of Arabs were taken by bus
from East Jerusalem to the Allenby bridge, though there is
no evidence of coercion. The free Israeli-organized
transportation, which began on June 11, 1967, went on for
about a month. At the bridge they had to sign a document
stating that they were leaving of their own free will.
Perhaps as many as seventy thousand people emigrated from
the Gaza Strip to Egypt and elsewhere in the Arab world. On
July 2 the Israeli government announced that it would allow
the return of those 1967 refugees who desired to do so, but
no later than August 10, later extended to September 13. The
Jordanian authorities probably pressured many of the
refugees, who constituted an enormous burden, to sign up to
return. In practice only 14,000 of the 120,000 who applied
were actually allowed by Israel back into the West Bank by
the beginning of September. After that, only a trickle of
"special cases" were allowed back, perhaps 3,000 in all.
In addition, between 80,000 and 110,000 Syrians fled the
Golan Heights, of which about 20,000 were from the city of
Quneitra.
Jewish
Immediately after Israel's victory, Jews living in the
Arab world faced persecution and expulsion. According to
historian Michael B. Oren,
mobs attacked Jewish neighborhoods in Egypt, Yemen,
Lebanon, Tunisia, and Morocco, burning synagogues and
assaulting residents. A pogrom in Tripoli, Libya, left 18
Jews dead and 25 injured; the survivors were herded into
detention centers. Of Egypt's 4,000 Jews, 800 were arrested,
including the chief rabbis of both Cairo and Alexandria, and
their property sequestered by the government. The ancient
communities of Damascus and Baghdad were placed under house
arrest, their leaders imprisoned and fined. A total of 7,000
Jews were expelled, many with merely a satchel.