EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- 'Beyond Orwellian': Outrage Follows Revelations of Vast Domestic Spying Program
- The Bill of Rights Exists: An Open Letter to Dianne Feinstein
- Major Loss to Organic Farmers as Court Rules in Favor of Monsanto
- Naomi Klein: 'Anti-Shock Doctrines' Show the Way to Resist
- NSA Whistleblower Revealed: Q&A with Edward Snowden
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Six-Day War, 40 Years Later
Israel went to war 40 years ago this week more because of "psychological weakness" than because of a genuine strategic threat--that's the conclusion of Tom Segev, one of Israel's leading historians, and author of the new book 1967: Israel, the War, and the Year that Transformed the Middle East. June 5 is the 40th anniversary of the beginning of Israel's Six-Day war, when the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza began. I spoke with Tom Segev on the phone in Jerusalem on Monday.
The prevailing view of the war, in both the US and Israel, was expressed by historian Michael Orren, who wrote in the LA Times on Sunday that the war "saved Israel from destruction." Segev commented, "We don't really know that. We don't really know what the Arabs intended to do." But we do know what Israelis thought: "They thought Egypt was out to destroy them. It's really a psychological matter more than a clear-cut strategic one. Psychologically Israelis were very weak on the eve of the Six-Day War; they believed they were facing a second Holocaust."
How much of that psychology was an accurate response to the strategic situation, and how much was caused by other factors? "The crisis of May 1967 caught Israel at a weak point in its history," Segev said, "with economic recession and unemployment, more Israelis leaving Israel than Jews coming to live there, a generation gap with people fearing they were losing their children as Zionists, and a widespread feeling that the Zionist dream was over. And beyond that Israel was feeling the first acts of Palestinian terrorism, and the army had no answer to that, just as it doesn't have an answer to today's terrorism. All this led to a deep pessimism. Then the crisis broke out."
I asked Segev whether he thought Israel over-reacted to Egyptian and Syrian threats by going to war. "I think this crisis might have been solved without war," he replied. "There were suggestions coming from Washington and several ideas in Israel about how to do that. But that required a stronger society, stronger nerves, stronger leadership, more patience, and we didn't have all that. So we gave in to an understandable Holocaust panic. That made war with Egypt inevitable. But to say today that the Six-Day War saved Israel's existence--that is not accurate."
Today we think of the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza as the main legacy of the 1967 war. Orthodox Jews regard the West Bank as the biblical land of Israel: Judea and Samaria. They believe God wants Jews to live there. I asked Segev how popular that idea was in Israel before the war. "It was not very popular," he said. "Most Israelis did not expect the Green Line to change. Some had hopes--there was a strong political party headed by Menachem Begin that advocated taking the West Bank, but most Israelis regarded that as unrealistic.
The government came to the same conclusion: "Six months prior to the war," Segev reports, "the head of the Mossad, the head of the Army intelligence branch, and the Foreign Office sat down together and did something Israelis don't often do — they thought ahead. They concluded it would not be in the interests of Israel to take the West Bank. Because of the Palestinian population, of course. Six months before this war. Then on June 5, Jordan attacks Israeli forces in Jerusalem, and all reason is forgotten: Israel takes East Jerusalem, and the West Bank, in spite of all the reasons not to do so, in opposition to our national interest."
Segev's book has a stunning cover: a photo of Israeli soldiers posing triumphantly in front of the Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, one of the three holiest shrines in Islam. When Israeli forces conquered the old city, he reports, the chief rabbi of the Israeli army advised his commanding officer to blow up the Dome of the Rock. "Everybody lost their minds," Segev explained. "Everybody was euphoric. There were lots of crazy ideas floating around. It speaks to the credit of the military commander that he told the chief rabbi of the army, 'if you repeat that suggestion, I will put you in jail.' But that was the atmosphere in those days--a feeling that the sky's the limit, we're an all powerful empire. The euphoria that followed the war was as wrong as the panic that preceded it."
As Israeli forces advanced through the West Bank, Segev shows, they pressured Palestinians to leave, to flee to Jordan. "200,000 Palestinians left the West Bank," he told me, "and at least half of them were actually forced to leave. Many are still in Jordan. When speak about the refugee problem we think about 1948, but there is a refugee problem from 1967 as well."
Back in 1948, the UN had called for the creation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, but Jordan occupied the West Bank and Egypt occupied Gaza. I asked Segev what kind of national movement existed among Palestinians on the eve of the Six-Day War. "It was very weak," he said, "not much more than a feeling of shared identity and solidarity. Actually as a result of the Six-Day War the Palestinian national identity became much stronger, just as Israeli analysts had predicted prior to the war."
Future prime minster Yitzhak Rabin supported Palestinian independence after the war, according to Segev, who reports that the Israeli government held secret talks at the time with Palestinian leaders. "Isn't that amazing?" he said. "Rabin was chief of staff. He felt it was the right moment to punish Jordan, to take the West Bank away from Jordan, but not God forbid, to control it--instead to give the Palestinians independence. He thought that was the right way to do it. By the way, that's what the government of Israel thinks today, 40 years later — and it's what most Israelis think."
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



19 Comments so far
Show AllI don't see any evidence that "it's what most Israelis think." Most Israelis seem to think that the status quo is fine for the forseeable future. If anyone has evidence to suggest anything else, please post it.
Check the Party platform of all major Israeli parties in the Knesset. 90% of the voters voted for parties that support two state solution, and end to Occupation, is evidence enough.
Even the Likus, which is a right wing party, support annunciation of only a small portion of the West bank, and the creation of a Palestinian state in the majority of the west bank and Gaza.
I fail to see how anyone can talk about the 6 day war without referring to the unprovoked and intentional attack on the USS lIBERTY by Israel in addition to the other issues.
See http://www.ussliberty.org/ for details
REMEMBER THE LIBERTY !!!!
June 8 is the 40th anniversary of the heinous attack by the Israelis. Almost as bad is the coverup by BOTH US and Israeli governments.
vets,
"Even the Likus, which is a right wing party, support annunciation of only a small portion of the West bank, and the creation of a Palestinian state in the majority of the west bank and Gaza."
It's that "majority of" that is the problem. They need to give the Palestinian's all of the West Bank and Gaza. No check points, no walls, no free rights to the water. Let them re-build their airport, government buildings and police stations. In short let them have an INDEPENDENT state.
I fail to see how people can ignore the USS Liberty attack when discussing this issue.
I want to remind people to take a minute on Friday, June 8th, to say a prayer for the 34 dead, 234 wounded, and 87 other survivors of the USS Liberty on the 40th anniversary of the unprovoked and intentional attack for over two hours by the state of Israel using planes and tprpedo boats on a virtually unarmed ship during the 6 Day War.
Israel has made a two-state solution impossible on the ground and is now doing everthing it can to undermine the democracy of a one state solution. Ethnic cleansing including the removal of Palestinian citizens is on the agenda. A state based on ethnic purity should not be tolerated and our support for it only creates enemies.
maggie50:
There are something like 440,000 Jewish settlers living in the west bank. I'm not judging them if it is good or bad, still, they are human being.
Do you want to expel them all?
(Also there are 1.2 million Palestinians living within Israel, Do you think it is fair and just to expel only Jews?)
I'm not a supporter of the Likud. As far as I remember - their platform is talking about giving the Palestinians 80% of the west bank, and annexation of 20% of the west bank, This 20% will have most of the Jewish settlers, + 200,000 Palestinians, who will gain full citizenship rights - if it will ever take place.
Other Political parties such as the Labor, and Meretz are talking about annexing only 3 or 4% of the west bank (By thus keep 70% of the Jewish setlers in their homes under Israeli control). and give similar land mass to the Palestinian state in exchange.
After all the pre-1967 borders are not holy. They are the cease fire line of 1949. Maybe going to the exact pre-1967 borders is not the optimal solution to minimize human suffering?
Jaded Prole: "Ethnic cleansing including the removal of Palestinian citizens is on the agenda. A state based on ethnic purity should not be tolerated and our support for it only creates enemies."
And the Arabs are all saints, right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_exodus_from_Arab_lands
Ethnic cleansing is a tragedy that happend to both sides in the 1948 war.
vets
Your wikipedia link has few citations and I suspect it is riddled with propaganda. Rewriting history is all too common when dealing with this region.
I would think most jews left the other Arab states on their own free will to stake a claim in Israel.
vets,
What part of "illegal settlements" do you not understand?
Yes I want to remove them all, and for the saftey and security of Israel, the Israelies sould insist they vacate land that is not theirs. They should also remove themselves from the Golan Heights.
maggie50:
Iligal to some, Disputed to others.
Supporters of the view that the territories are not occupied argue that use of the term "occupied" in relation to Israel's control of the areas has no basis in international law or history, and that it prejudges the outcome of negotiations. They regard the territories as "disputed" based on the following legal arguments:
No borders have been established or recognized by the parties. Armistice lines do not establish borders, and the 1949 Armistice Agreements in particular specifically stated (at Arab insistence) that they were not creating permanent or de jure borders.
The United Nations uses the term "disputed" about all other contested areas in the world — even those for which a stronger case for "occupation" can be made. In particular, the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem were not referred to as "occupied" during the 19 years that Jordan and Egypt controlled (and in the former case, annexed) them.
Territories are only "occupied" if they are captured in war from an established and recognized sovereign, but no state had a legitimate or recognized sovereignty over the West Bank, Gaza Strip or East Jerusalem prior to the Six-Day War.
The Fourth Geneva Convention is not applicable to the West Bank and Gaza Strip, since, under its Article 2, it pertains only to "cases of…occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party" by another High Contracting party. The West Bank and Gaza Strip have never been the legal territories of any High Contracting Party.
Even if the Fourth Geneva Convention had applied at one point, they certainly did not apply once the Israel transferred governmental powers to the Palestinian Authority in accordance with the 1993 Oslo Accords, since Article 6 of the convention states that the Occupying Power would only be bound to its terms "to the extent that such Power exercises the functions of government in such territory....".
Israel took control of the West Bank as a result of a defensive war. The language of "occupation" has allowed Palestinian spokesmen to obfuscate this history. By repeatedly pointing to "occupation," they manage to reverse the causality of the conflict, especially in front of Western audiences. Thus, the current territorial dispute is allegedly the result of an Israeli decision "to occupy," rather than a result of a war imposed on Israel by a coalition of Arab states in 1967. Former State Department Legal Advisor Stephen Schwebel, who later headed the International Court of Justice in the Hague, wrote in 1970 regarding Israel's case: "Where the prior holder of territory had seized that territory unlawfully, the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense has, against that prior holder, better title.
Advocates of this argument also claim that historically, Jews have at least as strong of a claim to the West Bank and Gaza Strip as Palestinians do, possibly stronger - the Land of Israel plays a far more important role in Jewish history than in Palestinian or Arab history, and there has been a continuous Jewish presence there for at least three millennia.
Regardless of what the Knesset says or the polling results in the US or Israel, Israel continues to create realities on the ground with an ever expanding wall and inhumane checkpoints in occupied Gaza and the West Bank. For the security of the entire world this horrendous apartheid must end! As an American I do not want my tax dollars funding ethnic cleansing, the distribution of American made weaponry and never-ending wars in the Greater Middle East from Beirut to Baghdad. I'd rather see those tax dollars going to peace efforts. More people need to speak out against this Muslims, Jews, and Christians especially have a responsibility here as their prophets came from this region. Peace is at the root of the Abrahamic faiths 40 years is enough.
More links on the attack on the Liberty:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident
curmudgeon99: - We don't know if it was an "unprovoked and intentional attack" or a case of friendly fire due to mistake of identity. After all, what was the motivation of Israel to want to fire on a friendly vessel?
Hi vets,
I could be wrong but the attack on the Liberty concided with the Israeli attack on the Golan Heights which Israel did NOT want the US to be awre of until the occupation was a fait accompli.
You are probably right - just a mistake that happened at a fortuitous moment for the attackers. Also the attack lasted for several hours. I guess the US flag was obscured by smoke from damage incurred - but just an accident, yeah, that's it.
curmudgeon99: I wasn't there, I can't really tell you if it was a case of mistake of identity, or a deliberate attack. Were you there?
If during the chaos of war it's so easy to identify friends from foe, than how can you explain these numbers?
In WWII 21,000 Americans died of friendly fire.
In Vietnam 8,000 Americans died of friendly fire.
2001 - American F/A-18 dropped 3 Mk-82 bombs on a friendly observation post killing six and wounding 11 at Al Udairi Range, Kuwait.
2002 - American F-16 pilot Harry Schmidt killed four Canadian soldiers and injured another 8 in the Tarnak Farm incident.
2003 - American aircraft attacked a friendly Kurdish & U.S. Special Forces convoy, killing 15. BBC translator Kamaran Abdurazaq Muhamed was killed and BBC reporter Tom Giles and World Affairs Editor John Simpson were injured. The incident was filmed. [12]
2003 - American Patriot missile shot down in error F/A-18C Block 46 Hornet 164974 of VFA-195 50 mi from Karbala, Iraq, killing the pilot.
2003 - American Patriot missile shot down a British Panavia Tornado GR.4A ZG710 'D' of 13 Squadron killing the pilot and navigator, Flight Lieutenant David Rhys Williams and Flight Lieutenant Kevin Barry Main, both from 9 Squadron
2003 - British Royal Marine Christopher Maddison killed when his river patrol boat was hit by missiles after being wrongly identified as an enemy vessel approaching a Royal Engineers checkpoint on the Al-Faw Peninsula, Iraq.[6]
2003 - British Challenger 2 tank came under fire from another British tank in a nighttime firefight, blowing off the turret and killing two crew members, Corporal Stephen John Allbutt and Trooper David Jeffrey Clarke [13]
2003 - 190th Fighter Squadron, Blues and Royals friendly fire incident - March 28, 2003 when a pair of American A-10s from the 190th Fighter Squadron attack four British armoured reconnaissance vehicles of the Blues and Royals, killing Lance-Corporal of Horse Matty Hull, during the invasion of Iraq.
2004 - Pat Tillman, famous American football player and friendly fire victim in Afghanistan
2005 - American soldier Mario Lozano is suspected of killing Italian intelligence officer Nicola Calipari and wounding Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena in Baghdad. Sgrena had been kidnapped and subsequently rescued by Calipari; however, it is claimed that the car they were escaping in failed to stop at an American checkpoint, and U.S. soldiers opened fire.
2005 - American troops opened fire on a Bulgarian convoy. Junior Sergeant Gardi Gardev was killed.
2006 - Two U.S. A-10 Thunderbolt IIs strafed their own NATO forces in southern Afghanistan, killing Canadian Private Mark Anthony Graham, and seriously wounding five others when soldiers were trying to seize a Taliban stronghold along the Arghandab River. Graham was a former Canadian Olympic athlete who competed on the Canadian 4x400 Men's Relay Team at the 1992 Barcelona Olympics.
2007 - American airstrike killed eight Kurdish Iraqi soldiers. [14]
I've done some research on the issue of the "expulsion" of Jews from Arab countries. You can review it at:
http://psreview.org/content/view/16/70/
While it's a complicated issue, the general claim that Jews were expelled is more propagandistic than helpful. I've provided many scholarly references that are excluded from the propagandistic Wikipedia article. Among them is Tom Segev, the subject of the above interview.
Dlgreen thank you for your insight.
Vets - Good point. I was not there. I have tried to make myself aware of facts available - not just hearsay but substantiated evidence. How about you? It is known that the attack lasted over TWO HOURS. The Israelis did not respond to transmissions trying to get them to halt the attack. The Sec Def at time called back fighters from 6th fleet scrambled to protect Liberty - not once but twice based.
Most friendly fire deaths I am aware of happen in the 'heat of the MOMENT' and quickly end as per your descriptions in all your examples.
I wasn't there iether. So I woudn't know
However, a possible case of mistake of identity still apply.
Maybe the Israeli pilots were sure they were hitting an Egyption target? A flag on a burning ship is not so visible when you fly at Mach2. Maybe that is why they continue the attack for two hours starit?
Are you sure that line of communication were intact?
After all you are talking about two different uncoordinated armies (USA Navy, and Israeli Air force), each speak different language (English vs. Hebrew).
Maybe information was not relayable you would assume it should?
Thank you again KB99 and DLGREEN for your accurate info.
Vets,
the attack was not just by jets at mach 2 but also torpedo boats who, according to survivors, stood by (probably at mach 0) ostensibly to determine damage.
I am a little curious about your motivation to disparage and or ignore the veracity of the accounts of the US service personnel who have sworn statements about their end of the attack.
I have been told by what I consider to be reliable sources that the Moroccan government tried to convince its Jewish population to remain.(unlike, I agree, some other countries)