The David Project

1967 Six Day War

April 2010

Introduction
Hailed by many as the “Miracle in the Desert” the Six Day War of June 1967 forever reshaped the
geopolitical landscape of the Middle East. This defensive war on the part of Israel was the direct
result of Arab violations of international law, hostile rhetoric and terrorist attacks that led to a
preemptive Israeli strike on June 5, 1967. The overwhelming Israeli victory led to the acquisition of
Gaza and Sinai from Egypt, the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) and East Jerusalem from Jordan and
the Golan Heights from Syria. The war solidified Israel’s military superiority in the Middle East as
well as contributed to the development of U.S. – Israeli relations. However, despite these gains,
Israel was met with Arab rejection and continued hostility as it pursued a peaceful settlement and
recognition by its Arab neighbors.

Background to the Conflict

The Arab Front
The Arab defeat in the 1948 War of Independence and declining European colonialism led directly
to the rise of Gamal Abdel Nasser in a military coup in Egypt in 1952. Nasser was known for his
Pan-Arab, nationalist, secular, and anti-colonialist rhetoric.1 In 1956 when Nasser sought to
nationalize the Suez Canal, which had traditionally been operated by Great Britain and France, they
sought to reassert their power through military means. They along with Israel attacked Egypt in
October of 1956.2 The attack was condemned by the United States and the soldiers were forced to
withdraw. The UN negotiated cease fire saw the introduction of a UN peacekeeping force in the
Sinai and Gaza known as UNEF. Despite this overall appearance of Pan-Arabism and Arab unity
under Nasser, there was heavy internal discord among the many Arab nations during the 1950s and
early 1960s. The Syrian regime pushed Nasser to further confront the West and Israel, while the
more moderate and pro-Western Hashemite King Hussein of Jordan sought a more conciliatory
approach. In response to the pressure from Syria, Nasser stepped up his anti-Israel rhetoric by
exploiting the Palestinian situation as a means of showing his strength in the Arab world. In 1964,
Nasser called the first Arab Summit to convene in Cairo. The summit led to the formation of the
Palestinian Liberation Organization or PLO.3 The PLO began attacks on Israel; many originating
from the Jordanian controlled West Bank which displayed King Hussein’s weakness relative to
Egypt and Syria.

Israeli Front
Israel since its inception in 1948 was led by the Mapai (now known as Labor Party) which was
largely controlled by Israel’s founding father, David Ben-Gurion. However, during the late 50s and
early 60s rifts began to emerge that led to Ben-Gurion being ousted from leadership and sidelined as
a political player. Ben-Gurion was succeeded as Prime Minister by Levi Eshkol. Eshkol’s
government provided a new and distinct way of conducting government. Whereas Ben-Gurion
aided by his colleagues, Moshe Dayan and Shimon Peres, favored a military first approach; Eshkol’s
government focused more on social and economic issues while encouraging closer cooperation with
the United Nations and restraint against Arab aggression. Eshkol often came under fire from Ben-
Gurion and his colleagues as being soft and not prepared for the defense of Israel.4 Consequently
for Eshkol, his focus on the economy and social issues began to backfire as the Israeli economy fell
into recession and the Arabs began to sponsor more aggressive PLO terrorist attacks. In response to
these pressures and threats, Eshkol ordered a retaliatory raid of the West Bank town of Samu on 13
November 1966.5

Role of the Superpowers

The United States and Soviet Union took on greater role in the region following their victory in
WWII. While the Middle East became yet another regional battle in the context of Cold War, it had
added significance due to its vast energy resources. As with many of regions of the third world, the
decline of colonial powers Great Britain and France, left a political and economic vacuum in which
the US and USSR sought to fill. However, this proved difficult for the US because of its perceived
similarities to the former colonial powers. Many emerging third world states such as Egypt’s Nasser
saw the US as continuing the legacy of imperialism and exploitation. Naturally many states gravitated
towards the USSR which advocated revolutionary socialist ideas that sought empowerment of
“oppressed victims of imperialism and capitalism”. While both superpowers initially supported the
creation of the state of Israel for widely different reasons; the USSR quickly changed its approach
and favored closer ties with Israel’s Arab enemies. The Soviets from 1956 onwards invested over 2
billion in military aid alone to its Arab allies.6 While the United States always maintained its support
for the existence of Israel during the 1950s under President Eisenhower, it was not until the election
of President Kennedy, did the U.S. shift its policy more heavily in favor of Israel. Israel along with
Iran, became the two main pillars of US foreign policy in the region to balance against Soviet and
radical Arab threats.7 With closer ties forming with the United States, Israel which had received most
of its military aid from France previously, sought weapons from the United States to counter Soviet
military weapons and aid going to Egypt and Syria.

Escalation into War

On April 7th, Israeli jets shot down six Syrian fighters and mockingly buzzed over Damascus.8 It was
the beginning of more cross border attacks by Syria and its Palestinian terror groups which further
galvanized the Israeli government and people to take further action. These tensions were
exacerbated as the Israeli Independence Day celebrations approached on May 14th. A Soviet message
to Nasser informed him that Israeli forces had massed on the Syrian border. Although this message
proved to be false, it nonetheless made Nasser mobilize his forces in the Sinai and called for the
eviction of UNEF troops from the region. The eviction of UNEF sidelined the UN. U Thant, the
UN Secretary-General in 1967, was seen as weak and indecisive.9 With the UNEF slowly being
removed from the Sinai, Nasser’s forces took up strategic positions such as the port of Sharm al-
Shaykh, which overlooked the straits of Tiran which is a vital shipping lane to the east for Israel.
Eventually Nasser closed the straits.

The closing of the Straits of Tiran was a de-facto declaration of war on Israel by Egypt. However,
Israeli PM Eshkol was reluctant to declare war until all diplomatic options were exhausted. Israel
sought security guarantees from the world’s powers as well as support for their sovereignty and free
passage of the international waters of the Straits of Tiran. Prime Minister Eshkol sent Foreign
Minister Abba Eban on a multi-state tour in order to extract these guarantees and support. Eban got
mixed messages from declining colonial powers France and Great Britain, who were reluctant to get
involved in the Middle East. Eban then met with President Johnson in Washington DC. While
Johnson was a strong supporter of Israel, he was constrained by his involvement in Vietnam and
could never get Congress to consent to any support for military involvement in the Middle East if
war broke out. Instead Johnson offered a plan developed by the State Department and Pentagon
called the “Regatta” and urged Israel for restraint and patience. 10

The Regatta plan was an international call by the United States to forcefully open up the Straits of
Tiran. However, this plan failed to gain any traction among the European allies and the UN. With
Egyptian troops massing along the borders in the Sinai and Gaza as well as a new military alliance
signed by Jordan that allowed Egypt to control it’s military as well as Arab rhetoric at an all time
high, Israeli generals put tremendous pressure on Eshkol to give the orders for a strike. Moshe
Dayan, who was recently appointed Minister of Defense along with Chief of Staff Yitzhak Rabin
devised a plan of taking the initiative which was focused on destroying Egypt first then turning to
Syria and Jordan, the stage was now set on the Israeli side for a preemptive strike.11 12

The Conflict
The War started early in the morning on 5 June 1967 with a massive surprise Israeli air attack
targeting the Egyptian air force, which was largely grounded at several air fields in the Sinai. Known
as Operation Focus (Moked) his attack involved nearly all of Israel’s 200 aircraft and was a massive
undertaking for such a small state.13Despite Egypt anticipating an attack on any day, the entire
Egyptian military right up to its commanders Amer and Nasser were caught completely off guard.
Within a few hours almost the entire Egyptian air force was destroyed.14 While the ground campaign
had yet to begin, the war in the Sinai was essentially decided already as Egyptian soldiers had no air
cover to defend themselves against any Israeli assault. Air power was crucial for the IDF, which had
prided itself on establishing an elite air force with state of the art aircraft and highly trained pilots.
The IDF recognized the growing significance of air power in warfare and its experience in previous
skirmishes against the Syrian air force in early April, gave it the confidence that was needed to wage
such a bold campaign.15
The ground campaign in the Sinai and Gaza went relatively quickly as soon as the initial Egyptian
lines were broken through. The Egyptian military command was highly unorganized and panicked
once Israel had broken their lines and ordered a swift retreat out of the Sinai. Thus allowing Israeli
forces to easily cherry pick retreating Egyptian forces while on their march to the Suez Canal. While
Dayan’s plan of attack focused on Egypt first, Israel also had to contend with Jordan to its east and
Syria to its north. Eshkol and his cabinet pleaded with King Hussein to remain neutral in the conflict
and to not get involved; however his forces were under the control of Egypt and pursued aggressive
tactics which included shelling of Israeli forces. Jordan had a much smaller force that Egypt but had
better trained professional soldiers especially in its Arab legion unit as well as American made tanks
and British fighter aircraft. However they were still no match for the highly trained and well
equipped IDF. Thus the IDF began an eastern push that included taking the West Bank and east
Jerusalem from the Jordanian forces. The IDF encountered heavy Jordanian resistance in and
around east Jerusalem as the United Nations Security Council pressed for a cease fire on all
hostilities. Thus Israel hastily set forth to take east Jerusalem before any UN cease fire could be
secured by midday June 7th. 16 Now that the IDF had secured the main Israeli objective of taking east
Jerusalem, which included the old city of Jerusalem and the holy sites of all three major Abrahamic
religion, Israel now declared its support for a ceasefire but still pressed eastward all the way to the
Jordan river. By June 8th Egypt had accepted a ceasefire as Israeli forces had soundly defeated them.

Syria which had done the most to agitate war with Israel, took a rather cautious approach when
news came that the war had begun. Syria first heard news that Egyptian forces had decisively beaten
down the IDF and was soon on its way towards Tel Aviv. However this reports were largely false
and were propaganda put out by the Egyptian media. This became more apparent when the IAF,
after destroying the Egyptian air force, turned its sights on the Syria air force. The IAF quickly
destroyed most Syria war planes. Syria, still taking a conservative approach, however, took up the
higher ground in the Golan Heights and began shelling Israeli towns and cities in northern Israel.
While the Israeli leadership was reluctant to confront Syria in Golan, Dayan took matters into his
own hands and ordered the IDF to seize the Golan Heights and destroy the Syrian army there on
June 10th. This was the final battle of the Six Day War and was a swift Israeli victory.

Analysis & Aftermath

Israel
Israeli forces were a highly organized and efficient fighting force that had clear objectives and high
morale with a heavy emphasis on modern military tactics that included overwhelming air power and
highly mobile army units. Israel’s overwhelming victory brought it both international praise and
condemnation. Most of the criticism came from the communist bloc states and Islamic nations, who
also took part in violence against their Jewish minorities.17 The United States was Israel’s biggest
supporter. While helping Israel very little militarily, the US took much pleasure in seeing a
democracy destroy Soviet aligned Middle Eastern states. With the conquered territories of the Sinai,
Gaza, West Bank, and the Golan Heights; Israel now found itself almost tripling in size and in
control of 1.2 million Arabs. The Israeli Cabinet met on 19 June 1967 to decide on the new
territories. The Cabinet voted on to exchanged Sinai and the Golan Heights for peace treaties with
Egypt and Syria, respectively. This became later known as “land for peace”. This decision was only
passed by one vote in the Cabinet. The issue of the West Bank and Gaza could not be resolved,
many ministers wanted to create an autonomous Palestinian entity there. But it was placed under
military administration. The only issue that reached a solid consensus in the Cabinet was over a
united Jerusalem.18 Like the 1948 war, many Palestinians fled their homes during the conflict that
created a refugee problem in the neighboring Arab states. While Israel had little to do with the flight
of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, it also did not do anything to prevent it or encourage the
refugees to return. Israel insisted that the refugee problem would have to be solved within the
framework of a comprehensive peace treaty; however, the Arabs soundly rejected this plan and
insisted that all the refugees be repatriated and compensated without any conditions. 19

Arab States
The total annihilation of the Arab armies of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria led to their complete
humiliation. Nasser who had promised the Arab world a new system of rule, that would unite all
Arabs and rid them of the shame that had been forced upon them by the imperialist powers of the
west and Israel, proved to be a false promise. The war ended an era of domination of secular
military regimes whose Pan-Arab rhetoric called for uniting the Arab world. As a result, radical Islam
took the place of secular Pan-Arabism. This radical form of Islam was a combination of the
fundamentalist Whabbism from Saudi Arabia that inspired Al-Qaeda as well as the Muslim
Brotherhood which would later inspire terrorist organizations like Hamas.

Immediately following the war, Arab leaders gathered in Khartoum, Sudan and together formulated
a policy that would exist among the Arab states until the 1973 war. In a joint declaration the Arab
states explicitly stated that there will be no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no
negotiations with Israel. This statement was followed by the UN Security Council Resolution #242.
In this document, the policy of “land for peace” was set forth. This principle stated that Israel must
withdraw from territories acquired during the war as well as securing the right of Israel to live within
secure and defensible borders to be negotiated at a later date. In accepting this resolution, it was
implicitly implied that you are now recognizing the state of Israel.20 Both Egypt and Jordan agreed to
this resolution with the more radical Syria and PLO rejecting it.

Conclusion
The success of the Six Day War has been heralded by many as a landmark event in which Israel
freed herself from Arab encirclement. The decisive Israeli victory had emboldened Jews from
around the world in celebration especially in the wake of the Holocaust and centuries of Jewish
persecution. This euphoria carried over to the Jews living in the United States who after the 1967
war became heavily involved in their support for Israel and support for a strong American-Israeli
special relationship. The war not only excited Jews but also many Christians, particularly in the
United States, who celebrated the restoration of Jewish control over all of Jerusalem.

While the Six Day War became a celebrated event for many, it has also left a number of issues that
are still lingering to this day such as: the disputed territories of Gaza and the West Bank (Judea &
Samaria) and the creation of a Palestinian state within this context as well as the Golan Heights issue
with Syrian. However, had Israel not been forced to preemptively defend herself from Arab threats
of destruction, many of these issues would not have developed. Overall the war brought profound
changes to a very complex and critical region and ensured the survival of the world’s only Jewish
state.
1
William L. Cleveland, A History of the Modern Middle East (Boulder, Colorado: West View Press, 2004),
303-308
2
Ibid, 312
3
Charles D. Smith, Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict, (Boston, New York: Bedford/St.Martin’s, 2004), 264.
4
Smith, 270
5
Smith, 267
6
Michael B. Oren, Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East, (New York: Ballantine
Books, 2003), 27.
7
Douglas Little, American Orientalism: The United States and the Middle East since 1945 (Chapel Hill and London:
The University of North Carolina Press, 2002), 93-94
8
Smith, 273.
9
Ibid., 87
10
Ibid., 103
11
Oren, 149
12
Oren, 154
13
Oren, 172
14
Oren, 173-175
15
Moshe Gat, On the Use of Air Power and Its Effect on the Outbreak of the Six Day War The Journal of Military
History, Vol. 68, No. 4 (Oct., 2004), 1187-1215.
16
Smith, 277
17
Oren, 307
18
Oren, 314
19
Oren, 306
20
United Nations Security Council “ UN Security Resolution 242” Accessed at
http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/d744b47860e5c97e85256c40005d01d6/7d35e1f729df491c85256ee70068613
6!OpenDocument