Op-Ed: The Conveniently Forgotten Context of Israel's Six-Day War
This is Part 6 of a 10-part series exposing the underreported joint European and Palestinian program to bypass international law and establish a de facto Palestinian state on Israeli land.
In 1967, Israel fought a monumental six-day war with its neighbors, who invaded the small country in a combined military assault with the declared goal of wiping the Jewish state off the map.
To the amazement of the international community, Israel emerged victorious, gaining control over multiple territories, including the West Bank.
Historically known as Judea and Samaria and once home to a thriving Jewish population, the West Bank was occupied by Jordan without international approval from 1948 to 1967. In that time, the Hashemite Kingdom ethnically cleansed its Jewish residents and destroyed dozens of synagogues.
It renamed the region the “West Bank,” meaning west of the Jordan River, to sever any Jewish connection to the land in an attempt to legitimize its occupation of territory that was never within its internationally recognized borders.
When Israel wrested control of the West Bank from Jordan in 1967, it refrained from annexing the territory, immediately offering to exchange land for peace.
This unprecedented overture was met with three resounding “NO’s” at the infamous 1967 Arab Summit in Khartoum: “no recognition, no negotiations, and no peace with Israel.” Consequently, the West Bank came under Israeli military rule.
“For reasons I can’t begin to explain, Israel thought it could make everyone happy. That’s how this whole monster was created,” says Naomi Kahn, international director of Regavim.
The monster she is referring to is the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories, otherwise known as Israel’s Civil Administration, a unit of the Defense Ministry established to govern the local population in Area C and manage all issues pertaining to civilians, both Jewish and Arab.
Instead of extending Israeli law to the territory liberated in 1967, Israel’s leaders chose to “temporarily” maintain the existing legal framework until a negotiated solution with the Arabs could be reached. To this day, the Commander of the Central Region, rather than elected representatives, retains the ability to legislate and administer Area C.
“I am personally living under military rule,” Kahn says.
“It’s not only inefficient, but also ridiculous. It’s a massive bureaucracy that seems to be doing very little. The army — any army — is simply incapable of replacing the government. That’s not what armies are meant to do.”
Part 7 can be read here.
Part 5 can be read here.
Part 4 can be read here.
Part 3 can be read here.
Part 2 can be read here.
Part 1 can be read here.
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website. If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal, you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
