Subscribe to Print Edition | Wed., December 05, 2007 Kislev 25, 5768 | | Israel Time: 12:48 (EST+7)
Haaretz israel news English
web haaretz.com
  Back to Homepage
Rosner's Domain
Diplomacy
Defense Jewish World Opinion National
Print Edition
Advertising
Books Arts & Leisure Business Real Estate Easy Start Travel Week's End Anglo File Hanukkah
del.icio.us
Digg It!  new
Last update - 12:46 23/04/2007
U.S. had emergency plan for attacking Israel in 1967
By Amir Oren, Haaretz Correspondent

For some time, the United States had had an emergency plan to attack Israel, a plan updated just prior to the 1967 war, aimed at preventing Israel from expanding westward, into Sinai, or eastward, into the West Bank.

In May 1967, one of the U.S. commands was charged with the task of removing the plan from the safe, refreshing it and preparing for an order to go into action.

This unknown aspect of the war was revealed in what was originally a top-secret study conducted by the Institute for Defense Analyses in Washington. The full story is detailed in Haaretz' Independence Day Supplement.
Advertisement

In February 1968, an institute expert, L. Weinstein, wrote an article called "Critical Incident No. 14," about the U.S. involvement in the Middle East crisis of May-June 1967.Only 30 copies of his study were printed for distribution. Years later the material was declassified and can now be read by everyone, although details that are liable to give away sources' identities and operational ideas have remained censored.

Strike Command, the entity that was to have launched the attack on Israel, no longer exists. It was annulled in 1971 for domestic American reasons and superseded by Readiness Command, which was abolished in the 1980s in favor of Central Command (CENTCOM) which today includes forces in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan and Afghanistan; and the Special Operations Command (SOCOM).

The general who oversaw the planning in 1967 was Theodore John ("Ted") Conway, then 56 and a four-star general, the head of Strike Command.

On May 20, 1967, according to L. Weinstein's confidential study for the Institute for Defense Analyses, cable No. 5886 of the Joint Chiefs of Staff was sent to EUCOM and STRICOM. STRICOM was asked to refresh the emergency plans for intervention in an Israeli-Arab war: one plan on behalf of Israel and the other, on behalf of the Arabs.

The basis for the directive was Washington's policy of support for the existence, independence and territorial integrity of all the states of the region. This translated into adherence to the Israeli-Arab armistice lines of 1949. The policy was not to allow Egypt, or any combination of Arab states, to destroy Israel, but also not to allow Israel to expand westward, into Sinai, or eastward, into the West Bank.

The American pressure in this regard brought the IDF back from El Arish in Operation Horev in 1949 and from Sinai in 1956. A version of it would appear in Henry Kissinger's directives after the IDF encircled Egypt's Third Army at the end of the Yom Kippur War of 1973.

Conway replied to the Joint Chiefs cable four days after it was sent. He was doubtful about combat intervention, and preferred an operation to evacuate American civilians from Israel and from Arab states.

The next day, the Joint Chiefs asked Conway for his opinion about how the United States should act if the war were to be launched by an Arab action or, alternatively, by an Israeli strike.

"The ultimate objective would be to stop aggression and insure the territorial integrity of all the Middle Eastern states," he was informed in cable No. 6365 of the Joint Chiefs, with a copy to EUCOM.

Conway's reply to this, dated May 28, is described in the top-secret study as "a strong plea for complete impartiality." The United States was liable to lose its influence to the Soviets, the general warned, and therefore it must demonstrate "strict neutrality" and avoid open support for Israel.
The true importance of the Middle East lay in the American-Soviet context of the Cold War, Conway argued, and the American stance must derive from those considerations, not from "local issues."

Only as a last resort should the United States take unilateral action - and then only to put an end to the fighting. In the estimation of the STRICOM commander, the Egyptian forces were deployed defensively, whereas the Israelis were deployed in rapid-strike offensive capability.

On May 29, Conway recommended that any U.S. intervention be launched early in order to ensure the territorial integrity of all the countries involved; restoring the status quo ante would become more complicated as the attacking army captured more territory.

It might be difficult to determine which side had launched the hostilities, he noted, but the American response should be identical in both cases: a display of force, warnings to both sides, and if that should prove insufficient, "air and naval action to stabilize the situation, enforce grounding of aviation of both sides plus attacks on all moving armor or active artillery."

Following the cease-fire, U.S. ground forces would be moved in for peacekeeping missions. The return of territories would be achieved primarily by diplomatic means, with military force to be used only if "absolutely necessary."

General Earle Wheeler, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, barred the distribution of the planning concept to subordinate levels. A preliminary paper was prepared by June 5, the day the war erupted, and became outdated even before it could be used.

On June 6, when the success of the Israel Air Force was known, and as the divisions under IDF Generals Israel Tal, Ariel Sharon and Avraham Yoffe advanced into Sinai, the Joint Chiefs sent McNamara top-secret memorandum No. 315-67, recommending that the United States not intervene militarily, that it continue to work through the United Nations and bilateral diplomatic channels, including consultation with the Soviets, to stop the war, and that logistical support for all sides be suspended.

The American sigh of relief at the demise of the worst-case scenario - the danger that Israel would be destroyed - was replaced by the fear that the Arab defeat had been so crushing that the Soviets would intervene on their behalf, or at least would reap a diplomatic profit.

Because the United States did not know what Israel was aiming at, despite declarations by Eshkol and by Defense Minister Moshe Dayan that Israel had no territorial ambitions, the administration "now felt that it was necessary to limit [the Israeli] success to reasonable bounds."

Two retired IDF major generals, Israel Tal and Shlomo Gazit, who was then head of research in Military Intelligence, said recently, upon hearing the secret plan of the U.S. military, that Israel had no knowledge of this.

The IDF fought the Egyptians, the Jordanians and the Syrians without imagining that it might find itself confronting the Americans as well, in their desert camouflage fatigues.
Bookmark to del.icio.us
Construction conflict
Palestinians condemn Israel's plan to build new homes in disputed East Jerusalem.
Nuclear freeze
A new U.S. intelligence report maintains that Iran froze its nuclear program in 2003.
  1.   Our american friends 12:53  |  Dror 23/04/07
  2.   We should surrender to US immediatly. 12:59  |  Inyaki 23/04/07
  3.   this makes clear how alone Israel was then and remains so now... 13:08  |  Pavel 23/04/07
  4.   american strike 13:13  |  David 23/04/07
  5.   #1 - GET REAL 13:14  |  Boyd 23/04/07
  6.   shocking 13:37  |  Cipora Julianna Kohn 23/04/07
  7.   So they had a plan 13:39  |  Judith, Haifa 23/04/07
  8.   A SMART SCENARIO 13:41  |  Brant 23/04/07
  9.   Has there been any plans to attack Egypt? 13:45  |  Absolute Sweden 23/04/07
  10.   # 5 Boyd 13:58  |  christa 23/04/07
  11.   and this proves that we must do.... 14:00  |  realjew 23/04/07
  12.   US v Israel 14:05  |  Jerry 23/04/07
  13.   To David 14:12  |  Daniel 23/04/07
  14.   U.S.Liberty 14:12  |  Mordechai 23/04/07
  15.   A Big Question! 14:16  |  Avraham Shapiro 23/04/07
  16.   WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF ISRAEL HAD DEFEATED THE USA? 14:23  |  Alan SA 23/04/07
  17.   IF ISRAEL WASNT HELD BACK 14:27  |  SAM(NEW YORK) 23/04/07
  18.   u s emergency plan for 1967 war 14:28  |  ns 23/04/07
  19.   How about the pressure the US put on Israel in 73 14:28  |  Sam Weinstein 23/04/07
  20.   Too bad they didn`t do it. 14:36  |  Noura 23/04/07
  21.   there have always been plans 14:42  |  Brandon 23/04/07
  22.   ATTACK 14:43  |  citizen of earth 23/04/07
  23.   12# JERRY 14:43  |  alonitzafon 23/04/07
  24.   This plays into antisemite`s hands 14:45  |  Gili 23/04/07
  25.   You wish Noura in paris 14:46  |  Dror 23/04/07
  26.   This is why america is edom, children of esau 14:49  |  Dror 23/04/07
  27.   I Said So before 14:49  |  Mary 23/04/07
  28.   # 16 Alan SA 14:51  |  Mary 23/04/07
  29.   IAF straffed a US ship in int`l waters in 1967 14:56  |  Howard 23/04/07
  30.   #5 Boyd 15:03  |  Itsik 23/04/07
  31.   traitors? 15:06  |  Joe 23/04/07
  32.   #5 Boyd 15:08  |  Itsik 23/04/07
  33.   Also at Knox like Avraham, Dror 15:12  |  ATLAS 23/04/07
  34.   #5 15:22  |  Christian from USA 23/04/07
  35.   nothing new 15:22  |  israel4ever 23/04/07
  36.   us war plans 15:24  |  David 23/04/07
  37.   american jewery - to PAVEL 15:26  |  israel4life 23/04/07
  38.   DROR 15:31  |  what a pity 23/04/07
  39.   A misleading title and article 15:36  |  Michigan 23/04/07
  40.   HOWARD The IAF straffed a US ship in int`l waters in 1967.Really? 15:37  |  PETER SM 23/04/07
  41.   dror, scoundrel 15:42  |  nehemia dB 23/04/07
  42.   #29 - Howard 15:44  |  MichaelF 23/04/07
  43.   #14 - Mordechai 15:51  |  MichaelF 23/04/07
  44.   Most important revelation in this document... 15:56  |  Tarek 23/04/07
  45.   Howard #29 15:58  |  Gee 23/04/07
  46.   THIS SHEDS LIGHT ON THE USS LIBERTY 16:01  |  Meir Weinstein 23/04/07
  47.   US plans against Israel in 1967 16:03  |  NDM 23/04/07
  48.   what a pity, use your real name 16:11  |  Dror 23/04/07
  49.   Christian from USA 16:16  |  Hubal 23/04/07
  50.   Canada ~ USA border 16:19  |  Avrum 23/04/07
  51.   Response to Boyd 16:20  |  Dror 23/04/07
  52.   US opposed Britain, France and Israel in 1956 16:25  |  Mark Lincoln 23/04/07
  53.   It is almost never as you think 16:29  |  From the Moon 23/04/07
  54.   Wahington & intervention 16:32  |  curious 23/04/07
  55.   nehemiah DB 16:34  |  Dror 23/04/07
  56.   Has anything changed? 16:35  |  Zev 23/04/07
  57.   another thing Nehemiah 16:38  |  Dror 23/04/07
  58.   They have one for Canada too.. 16:39  |  Ryan 23/04/07
  59.   MichaelF totally false info onLiberty!! 16:43  |  John 23/04/07
  60.   Noura - watch yourself #20 16:51  |  William 23/04/07
  61.   It`s still not too late... 16:54  |  Dutch 23/04/07
  62.   The scoundrel 16:55  |  Dror 23/04/07
  63.   Why is this a surprise? 16:56  |  William 23/04/07
  64.   The USS Liberty 16:59  |  William 23/04/07
  65.   Will you now admit that USS Liberty 17:00  |  Equinox 23/04/07
  66.   Dror and towing cows 17:02  |  Tuvia 23/04/07
  67.   Meir Weinstein, I doubt it 17:04  |  Jake 23/04/07
  68.   Tarek, who conducted a naval blockade? 17:08  |  Jake 23/04/07
  69.   Why Is This News? US Has Plans for Everything (Except Iraq) 17:09  |  Jane 23/04/07
  70.   Howard, how many 1000`s did your country kill in `friendly fire`? 17:11  |  Jake 23/04/07
  71.   Liberty 17:13  |  Space 23/04/07
  72.   Dror and Israeli prostitution 17:14  |  Pilly 23/04/07
  73.   US plans against Israel in 1967 17:15  |  Shana 23/04/07
  74.   Well Citizen of the Earth, there was Iraq... 17:15  |  Jacob Blues 23/04/07
  75.   TO Dror 17:16  |  James 23/04/07
  76.   Tarek, the US also estimated Iraq had weapons of mass destruction 17:19  |  Jake 23/04/07
  77.   Dror 17:26  |  American 23/04/07
  78.   america is gutless when it comes to zionism 17:27  |  arab 23/04/07
  79.   Absolute Sweden is right 17:29  |  Jake 23/04/07
  80.