The Aftermath of the Six-Day War: Israel's Considerations and Decision on the West Bank

The Six-Day War ended on June 10, 1967, with Israel achieving significant military victories. However, the question of whether Israel should withdraw from the newly captured territories, particularly the West Bank, is often debated. This article explores the considerations and decision-making process that led to Israel's stance.

Reasons for Not Withdrawing from the West Bank

Following the Six-Day War, Israel was faced with two primary considerations regarding the West Bank:

Strategic Depth: At its narrowest point within the Green Line, Israel is only 12 kilometers wide. Retaining control of the West Bank was seen as a vital step in securing strategic depth, providing a buffer zone that would enhance Israel's national security. This strategic advantage cannot be understated, given the ease with which Jordanian forces could enter Israeli territory. Historical and Religious Significance: The West Bank, due to its indigenous Jewish history and its significance in Judaism as Judea and Samaria, was considered a piece of land deeply rooted in the Jewish identity. Additionally, the League of Nations had already allocated parts of the area to Jewish interests, making its retention a matter of historical and legal significance.

The Israeli Offer for Peace

Very soon after the war, Israel made a significant offer to the neighboring Arab states. In exchange for peace, Israel was willing to withdraw from the Sinai, Gaza, the Golan Heights, and the West Bank, with the exception of Jerusalem. This offer was made under the premise of a simple peace agreement, essentially asking the Arabs to recognize Israel and end hostilities.

The Arab Rejection

The Arab response to Israel's offer, known as the Khartoum Resolution, was unequivocal. The three "Nos" of the resolution (no peace, no recognition, no negotiations) effectively torpedoed any prospects of a diplomatic resolution at the time. This rejection was a turning point in the ongoing conflict, further solidifying Israel's position on the West Bank.

The West Bank and the Jordanian Perspective

Following the Six-Day War, Jordan renounced its claims to the West Bank in 1988. However, this action did not significantly alter the complex geopolitics of the region. In the 1970s, several peace plans were proposed that would have given the West Bank to Jordan, a move that would likely have reduced tensions in the region.

These plans were, however, rejected by Yasser Arafat and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which sought an independent Palestinian state. With the election of Menachem Begin as Israeli Prime Minister in May 1977, the focus shifted to maintaining control of the West Bank, known to Israelis as Judea and Samaria. This decision was made based on the belief that the West Bank was crucial for Israel's security and identity.

Peace Plans and Future Considerations

One potential framework for a separate Palestinian state and a two-state solution could be the Allon Plan. This plan aimed to transfer much of the territory to Jordan while simultaneously ensuring that Jordan did not move its military forces into areas adjacent to Israel.

Given this historical context, my personal peace plan closely aligns with the principles of the Allon Plan. It suggests a balanced approach that would return much of the land to Palestine while maintaining safeguards to prevent potential security threats.

Understanding the complex history and considerations surrounding the Six-Day War is essential for comprehending the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This article aims to shed light on Israel's decision-making process and the reasons behind its stances on the West Bank.