Israeli Perception of the Six Day War and the Security Dilemma - Research Paper Example

? Israeli Perception of the Six Day War and the Security Dilemma al Affiliation In this paper, the perception of Israeli on the Six Day War and the security dilemma is discussed. The war broke out on June 5, 1967 and ended on June 10 the same year. This war was between five Arab countries namely: Israel, Egypt, Syria, Jordan and other neighboring countries. It was caused by the Egypt`s decision to block Israeli from navigating on the Gulf of Aqaba, its decision to withdraw UN forces from Sinai, the blockage of the strait of Tiran and Fatah and PLO raid on Israel. The Israeli were angered by the actions of the Arab Nations and the lack of action from the United States and UNEF. Israeli decided to seek a peaceful agreement from the U.S. and UNEF but failed to reach an agreement, this made the Israeli’s to start war with the Arab countries, and in the end Israeli emerged victorious over these countries. Israeli`s Defense Forces had no reason to go to war but were forced by circumstances to fight, for the protection of its people, and securing security for its people. Key words: Israeli, Six Day War, Security, Dilemma, Perception, Israel, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Arab, U.S., Israeli Defense Force, Army, National Security, Doctrine, Forces, Quality, Quantity, Resources, Threat The Six Day War was a war between five Arab neighbors namely; Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Israeli and her neighbors, in which Israeli captured the most part of Arab territory. This war broke out on 5 June, 1967 and ended on 10 June 1967, following a three week tension, when the Israelites learned that Egypt had deployed a large army in Sinai Peninsula. The cause of the Six Day War was as a result of increased tension between Israel and its Arab neighbors in the mid 1960`s. Israeli ruling to divert the waters of River Jordan to Negev Desert frustrated the Arabs, who wanted the river to flow to Lake Galilee. Syria had begun to divert the waters but this made Israel bomb Syria in the years 1965 and 1966. Egypt played a big role in the Six Day War; this was because of the: blockade of the Gulf of Aqaba, the Fatah and PLO raid on Israel, the creation of an independent Israel, Israel decision to strike first in 1967, and expulsion of UN forces from Egypt (Rea and Wright, 1997). Historians sited that the reason for Israel attack was because of the poor economic conditions it was experiencing at the time. They explained that a war would distract people`s minds from unemployment and low development and this would bring foreign currency, to boost the economy (“Causes of the War,” n.d.). The cold war tension motivated and exploited the soviets, to take advantage of the destabilized region, and provide them with military and economic assistance, in order to outsmart Jordan and Iraq, as it increased threats on Israeli By the end of the war, Israeli had captured triple the size of the area controlled. Israeli unified Jerusalem, Sinai, Golan Heights, Gaza Strip and West Bank. Israeli hope was to have peaceful negotiations with the Arabs states (Bard, 2012). Israelis perspective on the events that led to the Six Day War was influenced by views of itself in the region and in the international community during that time. Israeli thought its existence was been threatened, before the war broke out, leaders were also concerned about how Israel would survive. This made Israel to pay back the continued Arab hostility and specific attacks. They thought that this would make the Arab leaders cease to attack Israel and caution them to control their acts against Israeli. Many unfriendly superpowers gave Arab countries aid to attack Israeli, and this angered them because of their hostility and unfriendly ways. The main reasons for Israeli attacks were the severe Arab threats, and the role of the United States in a threat that was serious. On May 23, President Nasser of Egypt announced the blockage of strait of Tiran, this changed Israeli`s perception. The question many asked was, what is the United States doing about this decision, and was is it taking action in support of the 1957 pledge to Israeli, that related to the passage through the Strait to and from Port of Eilat. The second reason was the relationship between the United States and Israeli, by 1967 there was a significant connection with the United States commitment to security and Israelis survival. Israeli wanted to know the United States standing concerning the threats imposed by the Nasser, Egypt`s President. In May, Egypt forces were assembled, this made Israeli to react viewing this as a sign of show off, and to acknowledge the role played by the Egyptian leader. The mobilizing of the forces was as a result of the Aqaba restriction; this changed the views of the Israelis. With this reaction from Egypt, it was clear that Nasser wanted to create war with Israeli. Israelis had a quick response regarding this restriction on the Gulf of Aqaba. It insisted that the Strait was an international waterway, and it should be opened for the Israelis. In 1956, Israeli withdrew its troops from Sinai Peninsula, but after an assurance that the freedom of navigation was guaranteed in the Gulf. In February 1957, there was an American Aide Memoire, that stated that no country was to prevent the free flow of the Gulf and no restriction, because it was an international passage way. During that period Israeli utilized the waters of Gulf of Aqaba, and the River Strait, in response to send minister Abba Eban to the United States to analyze America’s position. During his visit, he explained about the Gulf of Aqaba and River Strait as international passage ways. Another conflict arose from the diversion of River Jordan by the Syrians, according to Israelis perspective; this required a quick response (Parker, 1996). During the visit, the Minister tried to seek help from the United States, and England to help Israeli with the problems of the Gulf of Aqaba, and River Strait. The response to this complain took more time than needed and this resulted to public pressure. Historical memories influenced the Israeli`s views. The surrounding regions were not willing to accept the existence of the international system. There are several perspectives that state that Israeli didn’t provoke the war, but it was reacting to various actions. In this case, there are clear ways that the war would have been prevented. With the continued actions from Arab countries that could be stopped, by either the United Nations or by the UNEF, the Israeli`s were not seeking war or conflict, but they were generally reacting to the Arab actions. During this time, Israeli was under pressure from the United States not to react (Parker, 1996). The Six Day War between Israeli and other Arab countries was a first and conclusive victory for Israeli, allowing it to control many territories it had lost in 1948. According to Israeli’s perceptive it was regarded as a defensive war. On May 15 during Israel’s independence day, Egyptian forces begun taking control of Sinai, and other Israeli`s territories. Syria had also taken position along the Golan Heights, ready for battle. While Egypt drove the UN troops out of Sinai, this paved way for war. This war was referred to as a defensible war because; it was not acquiring territory in an aggressive way, but in a defensive way and the recapture of Israeli territory (Wallace, 2012). Egypt and Syria came together to combine forces along the Suez Canal and Golan Height, to attack the Israel as perceived by the Israeli`s. The attack was to take place during the Judaism holiest day and Israeli`s considered this to be ruthless (Caplan, 2010). The main reason behind Israeli’s occupation was not based on security, but rather territorial advancements. The capture and occupation of Israeli was mainly because of security reasons, this was because since the start of the Six Day War, Israeli`s main objective was to secure peace within its territories, which was referred to as Armistice lines and cease-fire lines. Israeli’s perception on security has not changed, and its territories are well protected, since then Israeli has always had the security of its people. During the six day war, Israeli adopted a new defense strategy of defensible borders. With Egypt controlling Israeli`s territory, this made them to widen their defense and provided adequate defensive barriers near the Jordan River, Suez Canal, and West Bank Mountain Range. These changes lead to the revision on their security concept, by adopting the new strategy. Its defensive strategy was based on a strong area comprising of natural obstacles, which was capable of defending a modern army. Cease fire was seen as a way of providing Israeli with the ability to contain a blow, and hence conducting a major counter attack. This method was viewed to be a better way to strategize their defense. With the introduction of the defensible border strategy, and creation of Bar-lev lines, Israeli`s ability to fight was decreased, this was because many people would lose their lives as a result of the communicable lines between them which were subjected to Egyptians attack. The new strategy was able to absorb the first blow from their enemies, a strategy that had not been used until the time of the war. The Defensible borders was a passive way of defense as profound by the Israeli`s Defense Forces. Another Israeli security strategy is the concept of Quality versus Quantity, which according to Israeli`s perceptive, was a balance of forces and resources. Such a dilemma started Israeli`s emphasis on quality, in absence of quantity, its not good but is forced by the size of a country. Israeli`s concept on quality in the security dilemma reflected the exploiting of all existing resources, and efficiency as compared to their enemies. There were attempts to fully utilize Israeli`s soldier’s technological literacy so as to exploit the force multiplier. Training and good leadership was essential for the force multiplier, to maintain competence and energetic soldiers. The qualitative edge was built on the reasons that Israeli was a more economically, and socially developed community. The Israeli`s Defensive Force was formed in such a way that it was a people`s army, whereby they would educate and integrate their citizens. The people would function well among the IDF and this boosted the Israeli`s economy and social aspect in the society. The reason for the use of qualitative edge was to maintain National Security Doctrine. With a well established infrastructure and manpower, the IDF were able to defend the country during threats and battles (Catignani, 2008). Israeli`s defensive ways for protecting its citizens and territories were enhanced. In 1967, two factors influenced Israeli`s relation with its Arabs neighbors, this was Jordan`s security along the border, and the outcome of West Bank in case Jordan decided to change its Government. A mutual relationship was developed for a common interest, which was to safeguard the security of Jordan. Israeli and Jordan developed a peace agreement because Jordan was facing daily security. The Israeli opted to move to Jordan territory on the West Bank, if Jordan threatened Israeli`s security (Shemesh, 2008). The Six Day War was an important phase on Israeli`s security, after twenty years of hard work and improved strategy doctrine helped in the Israeli`s defense. The Israeli defense force may have not been capable of discouraging Nasser, but the IDF could fight Nasser. Israeli`s National security had been undisputed and this proved to be a successful method (Lustick, 1988). Each move by the Arabs and Egyptians to attack was met by a counter attack from the Israeli`s defense forces. The Israeli`s decided to give a surprise attack because it had a unique national dilemma. Israeli`s surprise attack started the Six Day War, the armed forces were alerted in readiness of the war, and tankers were placed near the Egypt border. For years the IDF were always ready for war, they had a well-detailed strategy for the attack. The first plan was the defensive plan that was to be implemented for full attack on the Arab Nations; the second plan was the pitchfork against Egypt, scourge against Jordan, and sledgehammer against Syria. These offensive attacks could be implemented if there was enough evidence of an attack. Israeli Government feared the coalition of the Egyptian and Arab Government, that they would attack before the IDF attacked. It also feared that the Arabs would be aware of the war if the Israeli Government gave the IDF a green light to attack. The number of Egyptians forces grew in the Sinai territory and this gave a green light for the attack. The Israeli Government anticipated an attack in order to prevent the destruction of its slow economy (Knorr and Morgan, 1983). In conclusion, the Six Day War was a war between Israeli and the Arab Nations (Syria, Egypt and her neighbors). The war started on 5 June, 1967 and ended on 10 June, 1967, as a result of a three week tension between Israeli and Egypt. This was caused by the Egypt`s actions like withdrawal of UN troops from Sinai, Israeli`s decision to divert the Jordan River to Negev Desert, Egypt`s decision to create a restriction on the Gulf of Aqaba, and the Fatah and PLO rid on Israeli territory. As a result of these actions by the Arab Nations, Israeli’s came up with strategies to defend their country and their territories. The Israeli`s were angered by the actions that were portrayed by the Arab Countries, and they opted to seek for help from the United States and the UNEF, however they showed no interest in helping solve the problems between these countries. The United States forgot about the agreement made with the Israeli`s and this made them to go on war with the Arab Countries. The Israeli`s struck first, hence defeating the Arab Nations in the war, and taking back their territories that had been captured by the Arab Nations. Israeli Defense Forces had come up with strategies to ensure adequate security in the country, and in its territories even during the war. These defensible strategies gained Israeli`s power and control over their enemies, and these weakened their enemies. Reference List Bard, Mitchell G. (2012). The Six Day War and the War of Attrition, 1967-1970. Retrieved November 1, 2012, from http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/myths3/MF1967.html Caplan, Neil. (2010). Israel- Palestine Conflict: Contested Histories. West Sussex: John Willey and Sons. Catignani, Sergi. (2008). Israeli Counter- Insurgency and the Intifadas Dilemma of a Conventional Army. New York: Routledge. “Causes of the War.” (n.d.). Retrieved November 2, 2012, from http://www.sixdaywar.orconhosting.net.nz/html/causes.htm Knorr, Klaus, & Morgan, Patrick M. (1983). Strategic Military Surprise: Incentives and Opportunities. New York: National Strategy Information Centre Inc. Lustick, Ian. (I988). Books of Israel: Volume 1. New York: State University of New York press. Parker, Richard Bordeaux. (1996). The Six-Day War: A Retrospective. Gainesville: University Press of Florida. Rea, Tony, & Wright, John. (1997). The Arab-Israeli Conflict. England: Oxford University Press. Shemesh, Moshe. (2008). Arab politics, Palestinian Nationalism and the Six Day War: The Crystallization of Arab Strategy and Nasir’s Descent to War, 1957-1967. Oregon: Sussex Academic Press. Wallace, Cynthia. (2012). Foundations of the International Legal Rights of the Jewish People and the State of Israel and Implications for the Proposed New Palestinian State. Florida: Creation House. Read More