Why the 1967 borders are not safe for Israel (Part 2)
By D.J. McGuire | Tuesday, May 24th, 2011 | History, International
This post in the series dealing with recent Israeli history (here’s the Intro and Part 1) details the events of the 1960s, a critical – and perhaps the critical – decade for examining the region. It was in this decade that the Israeli-American alliance was forged and the “occupied territories” became occupied.
The decade began with a new American President: John F. Kennedy, and a sea-change in American attitude toward Israel. One of the great ironies of history: the president who first exposed the Nazi concentration camps to America (Eisenhower) became the most anti-Israel president in the 20th century, while his successor – the son of an Irish pol who ruined his career as an isolationist in the 1930s (Kennedy) – made Israel an American ally and arms recipient. In the view of the Kennedy Administration, Israel was in peril and had to be defended from its Arab enemies.
Fortunately for Washington and Tel Aviv, said enemies were in complete turmoil. Gamal Abdel Nasser, tried to expand his United Arab Republic beyond Egypt and Syria to include all Arabs. In 1961, a military coup in Syria ripped it out of the UAR and left Nasser with just Egypt. While Nasser contined to pine for Arab unity, Syria suffered a series of weak regimes and violent turmoil until the Ba’ath Party took over in 1963. A similar Ba’athist putsch in Iraq led to a three-way effort at Arab unity in Cairo . . . which fell apart. Iraq’s Ba’athists were bounced from power by the end of the year. More instability plagued both countries.
Nasser, meanwhile, grew ever closer to the Soviets, as did the various Syrian and Iraqi regimes. Only Jordan and Lebanon remained close to the West and less than beligerent towards Israel.
Then came 1967. By this point, Syria’s Ba’athists were in radical Marxist mode; Jordan’s King Hussein was under internal pressure for not being anti-Israeli enough; Iraq was now firmly in Nasser’s corner again; the Egyptian/UAR leader decided to make his move.
First, he tossed out UN peacekeepers who had been in Sinai since Israel withdrew from it in 1956. Then he blocked Israeli shipping from the Tiran Straits – the only way Israel could avoid the Suez Canal. Israel had repeatedly stated such a move was an act of war. That didn’t seem to bother Nasser, who on May 27 announced his plans for “the destruction of Israel” (BBC). Three days later, King Hussein solved his internal problems by signing a defense treaty with Nasser, one in which Nasser would control both Egyptian and Jordanian forces in case of war. On June 1, Israel’s ruling Alignment Party invited its opponents into a national unity government. The only question left was who would hit first.
As it turned out, it was Israel, and less than a week later (hence the term Six Day War), Nasser had lost the Sinai again, but Jordan also lost the West Bank and Syria – having come into the war on Egypt’s side, lost the Golan Heights. It was yet another dramatic military victory for Israel, except that unline 1956, the U.S. would not pressure them to give the gains back. Israel’s smashing victory with American arms over the Soviet-armed Egypt and Syria was considered a huge embarrassment to Moscow and a feather in Washington’s cap.
The Arab regimes went back into turmoil. Nasser resigned his post at the end of the war, only to reverse course the next day. Hussein dealt with more internal unrest, including the Palestinian Liberation Organization led by one Yassir Arafat. Syria’s Ba’athist dictatorship continued to rule, but not in a very stable manner.
Meanwhile, America held an election in 1968. While voters here focused on the Vietnam War and civil rights, the Middle East noted the leading figures were John Kennedy’s younger brother and Dwight Esienhower’s Vice President. Robert Kennedy was taken by a Palestinian assassin on the one-year-anniversary of the beginning of the Six Day war, while Richard Nixon was narrowly elected in November, leading everyone to wonder if he would follow in Ike’s footsteps.
Nasser would never be able to find out, he died in 1970 while trying to mediate a bloody civil war in Jordan between Hussein and Arafat’s group. That same year, Syria – who had intervened in Jordan on Arafat’s behalf – had another coup, this one led by Hafez al-Assad, who had apparently opposed the intervention in the first place.
So, much like in 1960, the Arab nations that would have wanted to eliminate Israel were felled by military defeats and internal turmoil. Unlike 1960, Israel now had large buffer zones and an American ally. It would take less than five years for both to become far less than met the eye, but that’s for Part 3.
Cross-posted to the right-wing liberal
Tags:
About the author
Former candidate for Board of Supervisors in Spotsylvania, current blogger, economics teacher, and long-rumored windbag. There are two causes closest to the heart: steering the country away from the social democratic nonsense that is sinking Europe, and convincing the rest of the "rightosphere" that the NBA really is a joy to watch.







Comments
2 Responses to "Why the 1967 borders are not safe for Israel (Part 2)"
I wish to highlight that in November of 1967 (a few months after the Six Day War) the United Nations passed UN Resolution 242. If the United States had wished to do so, she could have vetoed the entire thing by exercising this right in the Security Council, however it passed unanimously. A few months later, through her ambassador to the United Nations, Israel indicated her acceptance of UN Resolution 242 “for the promotion of agreement on the establishment of a just and lasting peace.”
Of course then we get into that the word “the” was not included before the word “territories” from the phrase:
“Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict”.
Apparently Israel’s position is that she did not agree to withdraw from all the territories, just some of them because the word “the” was not included. It is kind of like the selective interpretation that Israel will give to the Fourth Geneva Convention (Israel is a signatory) Article 49. The operative clause of that article being:
“The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.”
This snippet sums it all up right here, from your own post:
. One of the great ironies of history: the president who first exposed the Nazi concentration camps to America (Eisenhower) became the most anti-Israel president in the 20th century, while his successor – the son of an Irish pol who ruined his career as an isolationist in the 1930s (Kennedy) – made Israel an American ally and arms recipient.
Surely, you have read The Captains and the Kings by Taylor Caldwell. If you haven’t, please do so, and then re-read these very words you wrote.
Leave your response
The comments section is for meaningful discussion. Readers are reminded to post comments that are germane to the article and write in a common language that steers clear of personal attacks and/or vulgarities.
Please take a moment to review our comment policy.