Yom Kippur War

Yom Kippur War


Introduction

The relationship between the Israel nation and many Arabic states has been characterized by hatred and contempt for many decades because of religious and political differences. This has come along with various negative implications like the Yom Kippur war which claimed many Israelite lives and investments affecting the overall Israel economy. This paper is written to look at the Yom Kippur war of 1973.

The Yom Kippur war gained its name because it was launched during the Jewish religious ceremony called Yom Kippur in Israel which depicts the holiest day of the Jew calendar (Aboul-Enein, 2003 p 55). The Muslims on the other hand call it the Ramadhan war because the Arabs launched the attack during the month of Ramadhan which constitutes of fasting and prayer to their god Allah (Handel, 1976, p67). The Arabs have always held a bone of contention with the Israelites because of the control of historic Palestine boundaries and land which is held by Israel (Aboul-Enein, 2003 p 55). In a review of the History of this hostility between the Israelites and the Arabs; in 1967 there was a Israel- Arab war in which Israel gained control over Sinai Peninsula and the Gaza strip which was previously controlled by Egypt (Aboul-Enein, 2003 p 56). It also took control of the Golan Heights which belonged to Syria and the East Jerusalem and west bank which was also administered by Jordan (Zeira, 1995, p584). The Arab states did not take this lightly and threatened to use all the machinery under their power to take their land back from the Israelites and also humiliate them. The war as it turns out was planned and strategized in silence and those who were aware like the USSR kept silent about the whole issue (Aboul-Enein, 2003 p 56). Part of this hatred can be coined from religious differences in which Islam supports Jihad the holy war to kill those people who do not believe in Allah.

The Israelites being a nations that has in the past rubbed the shoulders of Israelites the wrong way have fallen victim of this holy with many suicide bombers launching attacks on the Israel nation and killing many innocent nationals.

The United Nations tried its level best to convince Israel to give the land back and get recognition of Israel independence and security from the Arab countries but Israel refused to heed (Aboul-Enein, 2003 p 56). The main reason for the resistance in the side of Israelites was because of past betrayals from the Arab nations and maintained that it would leave the land if the Arabs gave their guarantees for peace and security. Many Israelites had suffered under the hands of Arab's suicide bombers causing a lot of insecurity in the land of Israel. The Arab nations on the other hand refused to negotiate until Israel withdrew from the land they had taken (Aboul-Enein, 2003 p 56). It can be argued that the Arabs have less respect for the Israelites because of the way they treat them even up to date. According to all nations under the UN and which recognize the importance of human rights then any nation should respect any other nation and protect human life instead of killing people to force governments to heed to their fascists notions.

The culmination of this war was after Israel fortified itself in the land of Arabs and the United States seemed to support the Israelites (Zeira, 1995, p585). This made the Arab countries very furious and they also devised a way to make the west pay for its support to the Israel nation. The war was seen as the only solution for the Arabs to gain their land back from the Israelites because the rest of the world especially the super powers seemed not to heed to their complains about Israel. Basically the Arab nations are known for their production of oil products (Zeira, 1995, p586). Many countries including super powers like the United States depended highly on these oil products for the proper running and functioning of their automobile industries.

The Arab nations knew they could not successfully fight the Israel nation without the full support of other powerful nations like the Unites States which seemed to support the Israelites. It can be argued that the Arabs point of view was that if the Israelites had no one to support them then the Arabs would easily humiliate them and defeat them and even take control over them. The Arabs then decided to use the oil war to gain control over the west (Powell, 1974 p17). For instance they planned to stop providing oil in the west and force the west to conform to their demands by halting their support to Israel.

In October 1973 Syria and Egypt started the war in Israel so that they could gain access and regain the territories that Israel had occupied since the 1967 war (Zeira, 1995, p587). Many soldiers were wounded and both sides suffered heavy losses in terms of militia and war machinery and at the end the Israelites still retained control of the territories (Handel, 1976, p67). The Arabs were furious because they had been defeated by their biggest enemy and especially the fact that they had faced defeat during the month of Ramadhan. To the whole world the war created a lot of tension because it may have culminated to a world affair bringing about serious implication to the overall security of the whole world. The bitterness and anger that the Arabs felt for the Israelites was enough to even make them use any weapon to ensure that the Israelites were defeated and all the territories taken from the Arabs were returned. This prompted most superpowers and other governments to support Israelites and the cease of war to counter any actions that would jeopardize the peace of the world (Zeira, 1995, p589). For instance, the superpowers could not support Arabs because such an action would place the peace of many nations at a brick. On the other hand, supporting the Arabs would be detrimental because of their style of threats when they want something to be done for instance through murdering innocent
people through the Jihad war and suicide bombers. Subsequently, the Israelites had also wronged them because they had taken land that didn't belong to them and had refused to return it to the rightful owners. The Israelites can be argued to have been using the land they had taken control over as a defense mechanism to ensure that the Arabs gave their guarantee or security to the Israelites.

It can be argued that the Arabs knew the best time to strike was during the Yom Kippur holiday because it was a holy season and all Jewish citizens were obligated to celebrate it by virtue of religion and patriotism. This then implies that most of the Jewish soldiers would be in synagogues enjoying the ceremony in a relaxed mood because no one ever thought that anyone would ever launch an attack during the holy ceremony. At the time of the attack even the national radio was off air and this gave the Arab attackers an advantage because it would be very hard for Israelites to know their plight (Aboul-Enein, 2003, p 55). The Arabs assumed that by the time the Israelites came to know their plight, they would have gained access to their territories and taught the Israel forces a lesson. As the whole nation was in a relaxed mood the Egyptian and Syrian militia launched their attack catching them off guard. This was detrimental to the security of innocent civilians and the implications may have been very bad because the Israel soldiers were not even aware of any such attack. Aboul-Enein puts it that, the Israel intelligence had not foreseen such a war because of their prowess in military competence compared to the Arabs (2003, p 56). On the other hand even the super powers believed that Israel had an advantage when it comes to military undertakings because it has a more developed army compared to the Arabs. In the surprise attack Sadat's army gained access and crossed over the Suez canal as Egypt overcame Israel militia along the canals east bank Bar-Lev line which was one of the most protected Israel spots and highly impenetrable (Zeira, 1995, p586). With such an action the Israelites militia could have been driven to panic and easily given up because the enemy had encroached their territories too much but they gave in their best fight and still made it as the winners of the Yon Kippur war. The Egyptian forces were quick to establish its strong holds to its advantage as the Israelites scampered everywhere in panic (Aboul-Enein, 2003, p 55). Subsequently, Sadat did not have a strong army and he made a poor decision of taking hold of small piece of land along the canals east bank instead of taking full advantage (Zeira, 1995, p586). It can be argued that both the Egyptian and Syrian armies were taken by surprise by how successful they had been to penetrate the Israel territories and assumed that they had already succeeded in their mission. Again, both Syria and Egypt could have taken advantage of the surprise attack and inflicted much damage on the Israel army and also kill many Israel civilians but failed to take advantage of this opportunity. For instance Israel lack of preparedness would have acted as a perfect advantage for the Arabs to corner the Israelites and take their territories back (Aboul-Enein, 2003, p 56). On the other hand, there were irregularities in communications between Cairo, Egypt, and Damascus, Syria and between Moscow and Arab capitals. This greatly affected the success of the Arabic militia because instructions were misconstrued and not much could be done to correct the inaccurate communication in these centers.

As time went by Israel was able to regain its senses and started organizing itself and mobilize its troops to fight the enemy (Zeira, 1995, p587). This prompted counter attacks on the Egyptian and Syrian troops despite the serious casualties implicated by the Arabs on the Israel army. With determination and prowess in military undertakings Israel forces gained control of the land that Syria had captured and even pushed towards Damascus (Zeira, 1995, p587). This took the Syrians by surprise and the Israelites were able to claim the land that had previously been in the hands of the Syrian militia men (Aboul-Enein, 2003 p 56). At the same time Israel militia were also able to launch attacks on Egypt crossing the Suez Canal and advanced towards Egypt. This was a humiliation to the Egyptian militia because the Israel forces were now in the verge of gaining access of their capital city Cairo. As puts it, by the end of the Yom Kippur war Israel militia had advanced within 100km of Cairo and 40 Km of Damascus (Zeira, 1995, p589). This also proved the Israel prowess in war and militia compared to their counterparts the Arabs. The Arabs must have felt humiliated because they knew that the rest of the world especially the superpowers supported the Israel course. The whole world was in other words celebrating with the Israeli forces. Subsequently, Israel did not take control of the two capitals for the Arab nations and it can be argued that their action to proceed near to the capitols was to humiliate the Arabs at their own plans which had failed (Aboul-Enein, 2003 p 58).

It can also be argued that Israelis success in the war was facilitated by the support of the United States. The United States intervened and supplied weapons to Israel during the fighting while the Soviet Union supplied weapons to the Arab forces (Zeira, 1995, p589).

The war was becoming serious and the situation was also getting out of hand because the Israelites were about to eliminate the Egyptian third army near Cairo. Due to the presence international watchdogs and peace keeping organizations, United states also had the obligation of finding a tangible solution that would lead to cease fire and reduce the implications of the Yom Kippur war. Henry Kissinger who was the US secretary general of state at the time was sent to hold negotiation talks with Moscow to negotiate a cease fire with Leonid Brezhnev (Soviet leader) (Zeira, 1995, p589). The Arab Israel war was a matter of international security and the world had a role to help stop the war before it resulted to serious consequences (Powell, 1974 p18). Consequently the United Nations also intervened by passing a resolution which would prompt a negotiation between the Arabs and Israelites in order to find a lasting solution (Zeira, 1995, p590). This is because the prevalence of the Yon Kippur war could have led to various worse implications like employment of nuclear weapons especially by the Soviet Union to ensure that the Israelites were defeated.

As it turns out Israelites broke off the war but still controlled the Egyptian third army (Zeira, 1995, p590). These made the Soviet Union threaten to respond to Israelis failure to surrender and leave the third party alone. To the United States such a statement meant a lot of things one possibility insinuating the use of nuclear weapons in this fight. United States even placed their militia on a nuclear attack alert as a precaution just in case it happened (Powell, 1974 p17). This was just not any simple threat and this placed the world on an alert because if the attack happened it would be detrimental to the security of the whole world. The effort nations had invested for many decades could be destroyed in an instance. Various strategies were put in place to ensure that talks were held among the Israel and the Arab nations and a consensus reached. In December 21 a conference was convened in Geneva Switzerland which saw Syria decline to attend and later the conference was suspended (Zeira, 1995, p602). United States Secretary general took a major role in finding a solution for the disagreement between the Arabs and

Israelites though not to a long lasting term. In 1974 an agreement was reached that saw Israel return the Syrian territory hence maintaining some bouts of peace between the two nations (Aboul-Enein, 2003 p 57).

The Yom Kippur war came with various negative implications especially to the countries which supported Israel like the United States and other super powers of the world. Egypt's counterparts in the Yom Kippur war Syria, instead supported the rights of the Arab nations and development strong relationships with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) (Aboul-Enein, 2003 p 57). Intriguingly, Egypt broke its ties with the Union of Soviet Socialists Republics (USSR) which over the past decades had provided most military and economical aid to Egypt since the 19650a€™s and became close with the United States (Zeira, 1995, p600). The war was not taken positively by the Israelite nationals because they wanted peace with the Arab nations. The Israelite nationals blamed the war on the Israel government because they felt their leaders did not have the political will for them. This led to much criticism from the Israel nationals on their leaders and some of them had to resign as a result.

The war can be argued to be a major step that would see the Israel Arab agreement reached somehow although the bad blood would continue to rule between these nations. United States became a major negotiator in the dispute to ensure that an agreement was reached between these two nations (Aboul-Enein, 2003 p 59). Since the Arab leaders had opted to use the oil war to punish the west the United States did not have an option but to negotiate and find a lasting solution because of their over-reliance to the Arab oil.


Conclusion

The Yom Kippur war was used by the Arabs to act as a solution by the Arabs to regain the land that had been taken by the Israelites. The Arabs had tried to complain about the injustice done to them by the Israelites by the superpowers seemed to support Israel people. This added to the Arabs disappointment and made them to strategize for a war that would ensure that they got their land back. Israelites have over the past decades held bad relationships with the Arabic countries because of religious and political reasons and though efforts have been made to find lasting solutions the two nations are not able to reach a compromise. The Yom Kippur war can be described as a war that was used to prove the strength of the two warring nations. For instance the Arabs proved to the world and the Israelites that they could penetrate Israelites most secure parts like the east bank Bar-Lev line. On the other hand the Israelites also proved to the world and the Arabs that they were better in militia dexterity.





References

Aboul-Enein, Y. H. 2003. "The Yom-Kippur War: Memoirs of Egyptian Generals", Military Review, Vol. 83, Issue 1.
Handel, M. I. 1976. Perception, deception and surprise: the case of the Yom Kippur war. Jerusalem, Israel: Hebrew University of Jerusalem, (Jerusalem Papers on Peace Problems; 19).
Powell, B. C. 1974. The Yom Kippur War: did Israeli intelligence fail. Carlisle Barracks, PA., U.S.A.: Army War College.
Zeira, E. 1995. "Israel's Intelligence Failure of 1973: New Evidence, a New Interpretation, and Theoretical Implications." Security Studies 4, no. 3.

Posted by: Julia Vann