The real ”key words” of Resolution 242, as crafted mainly by Lord Caradon, are those about the need for “secure and defensible borders.” Carter doesn’t even mention this phrase, which Lord Caradon thought was the most important provision of the Resolution. For Carter surely knows that the pre-1967 lines he wants Israel to be forced back into would fit no one’s definition of “secure and defensible borders.” But what would constitute “secure and defensible borders”? As noted in Part I, the Israelis certainly think command of the heights of Judea and Samaria, and thus of the Jordan Valley and the invasion route from the East, remain essential. Were Israel pushed back to the 1949 armistice lines, a massed Arab army, with the weaponry the Arabs now possess, and coming from the East, could slice Israel in two at its 8-mile-wide waist.
In 1967, President Johnson asked the Joint Chiefs of Staff to study what territorial adjustments would be necessary to meet Israel’s minimum defense needs. They duly presented their military assessment of what, for Israel, would constitute “secure and defensible borders.” Here is what they concluded:
MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
(JCSM-373-67)
Subject: Middle East Boundaries
- Reference is made to your memorandum, dated 19 June 1967, subjects as above, which requested the views of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, without regard to political factors, on the minimum territory, in addition to that held on 4 June 1967, Israel might be justified in retaining in order to permit a more effective defense against possible conventional Arab attack and terrorist raids.[emphasis added]
- From a strictly military point of view, Israel would require the retention of some captured territory in order to provide militarily defensible borders. [emphasis added] Determination of territory to be retained should be based on accepted tactical principles such as control of commanding terrain, use of natural obstacles, elimination of enemy-held salients, and provision of defense in-depth for important facilities and installations. More detailed discussions of the key border areas mentioned in the reference are contained in the Appendix hereto. In summary, the views of the Joint Chiefs of Staff regarding these areas are as follows:
- The Jordanian West Bank. Control of the prominent high ground running north-south through the middle of West Jordan generally east of the main north-south highway along the axis Jennin-Nablus-Bira-Jerusalem and then southeast to a junction with the Dead Sea at the Wadi el Daraja would provide Israel with a militarily defensible border. The envisioned defensive line would run just east of Jerusalem; however, provision could be made for internationalization of the city without significant detriment to Israel’s defensive posture.
- Syrian Territory Contiguous to Israel.Israel is particularly sensitive to the prevalence of terrorist raids and border incidents in this area. The presently occupied territory, the high ground running generally north-south on a line with Qunaitra about 15 miles inside the Syrian border, would give Israel control of the terrain which Syria has used effectively in harrassing the border area.
- The Jerusalem-Latrun Area.See subparagraph 2a above.
- The Gaza Strip. By occupying the Gaza Strip, Israel would trade approximately 45 miles of hostile border for eight. Configured as it is, the strip serves as a salient for introduction of Arab subversion and terrorism, and its retention would be to Israel’s military advantage.
- The Negev-Sinai Border. Except for retention of the demilitarized zone around Al Awja and some territory for the protection of the port of Eilat, discussed below, continued occupation of the Sinai would present Israel with problems outweighing any military gains.
- The Negev-Jordan-Aqaba-Strait of Tiran Area. Israel’s objectives here would be innocent passage through the Gulf of Aqaba and protection of its port at Eilat. Israel could occupy Sharm ash-Shaykh with considerable inconvenience but could rely on some form of internationalization to secure free access to the gulf. Failing this, Israel would require key terrain in the Sinai to protect its use of the Strait of Tiran. Eilat, situated at the apex of Israel’s narrow southern tip, is vulnerable to direct ground action from Egyptian territory. Israel would lessen the threat by retention of a portion of the Sinai Peninsula south and east of the Wadi el Gerafi then east to an intersection with the Gulf of Aqaba at approximately 29’° 20′ north latitude.
- It is emphasized that the above conclusions, in accordance with your terms of reference are based solely on military considerations from the Israeli point of view.
The Joint Chiefs thought Israel should retain Gaza; it did not. Gaza then became a terrorist center, lobbing missiles into Israel, which led to the Israeli incursion that defeated Hamas.
But Israel still retains, and likely will not give up, control of the “West Bank.” It needs a minimum of defensive depth – that 8-mile wide waist will simply not do — and needs to control the Judean and Samarian hills. Anyone reading the report of the Joint Chiefs, or simply looking at a map, would likely conclude that Israeli command of the “West Bank” is absolutely essential to its security. But, someone might object – say, Jimmy Carter — didn’t Israel win the 1967 war without that control? Yes, it did, but that was in a different world, before the OPEC trillions helped buy the Arab states hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of armaments; they now possess between ten and twenty times the weaponry that they had in 1967, and that includes advanced planes and missiles, that a half-century ago they did not possess. The element of surprise – and superb training – that allowed the Israelis to destroy the Egyptian air force in the first few hours of battle on June 4 is not something that Israel can count on ever again; nor should Israelis be asked to rely on such a near-miracle for their survival. The Israelis remember that the surprise Arab attack in October 1973 inflicted many casualties. The outcome was a near thing; the country held on by the skin of its teeth, thanks to American re-supplies of arms that, in a different political environment – with the likes of Keith Ellison presiding over the Democratic Party apparatus – can not necessarily be counted on.
None of this Israeli need for “secure and defensible borders” registers with Jimmy Carter. He thinks Israel should not only live permanently in a state of maximum peril, but trust to guarantees by the Palestinian Arabs – the “peace-loving” Slow Jihadists of the Palestinian Authority, rather than the Fast Jihadists of Hamas. Is he aware of the blood-curdling statements Mahmoud Abbas makes about Israel to his own people? Has he ever watched the celebration of killing Jews on children’s programs broadcast by “Palestinian” television? Or noted the naming of sites in the West Bank after terrorists?
In addition to their rights derived from the Mandate for Palestine, Israelis should not be prevented from exercising their right, under Resolution 242, not to give back “all the” territories it won by force of arms, but instead to keep territories needed for “secure and defensible borders.” The Israelis have a perfect right – legally and morally – to hold onto those parts of Judea and Samaria that they now control. And they have a perfect right to build towns and villages (not “settlements,” for that word has come to imply both transience and illegitimacy) on “state and waste lands,” as the Mandate for Palestine specifically allows.
Jimmy Carter is hellbent on arriving at a “solution” to the Arab-Israeli conflict. But what makes Jimmy Carter think there is a “solution” to the Arab and Muslim war against Israel? The evidence supports quite a different view. I don’t think there is a “two-state” or three-state or n-state “solution” to a conflict that will continue forever, because it is based on Muslim hostility to a Jewish state, whatever its dimensions, on land Muslims once possessed, and in the midst of Muslim Arabdom.
That a conflict cannot be “solved” does not mean it is not manageable. Right now Israel can manage things. El-Sisi’s Egypt is clearly more worried about the Muslim Brotherhood and terrorists in the Sinai, and Hamas in Gaza. It’s Egypt that is now destroying the tunnels to Gaza, not Israel. And Syria is now and in the future will be wracked by internecine warfare. Assad and the Alawites are unlikely to risk everything they have managed to hold onto by taking on Israel.
But the Muslim masses do not accept Israel and never will. Right now the greatest threat comes from Iran, as it once came from Egypt and Syria. Israel is a permanent affront for many Muslims and it does not become less of an affront if it is pushed back, as Jimmy Carter wants it to be, to the armistice lines of 1948-49. The two metaphors the Arabs routinely use for Israel are that it is a “knife” in the heart of Arabdom, or a “cancer” within the Arab body. You don’t pull a “knife” only part-way out, nor excise only part of a cancer. You have to remove the whole blade, cut out the whole tumor.
Carter’s obsession with pushing Israel back to the pre-1967 lines, his completely ignoring the Mandate for Palestine, his misreading of Resolution 242, his unshakeable belief that Israel should entrust its security to the likes of Mahmoud Abbas doing his no-one-here-but-us-accountants impersonation – all this suggests that behind the sweet habitat-for-humanity smile, and the treacly self-righteousness, Jimmy Carter suffers from a well-known pathological condition. Meanwhile, if you want to really understand the legal, historic, and moral claims of Israel, begin by reading the Mandate for Palestine. And then, to understand what U.N. Resolution 242 actually means, you should turn not to Jimmy Carter, but to the man who was most responsible for drafting that resolution, that is, the commonsensical Lord Caradon.

Lucia Bartoli says
No matter what we just never forget the sign if true friendship is loyalty and to defend one another in times of peril and to join to defend a country from a common enemy. poor Jimmy must want to build houses for the Hamas terrorists before they slit open chests as they propose and encourage! I stand with Israel!!
Custos Custodum says
Behind Jimmuh’s avuncular smile is a heart filled with hate – hate of Jews, hate of African Americans, hate indeed of Middle America whose economy Jimmuh worked hard to destroy.
A Harris USA says
Me TOO Lucia!!! This Carter is another old fool that needs to move on…………..way on!!!
eduardo odraude says
Brilliant work by Mr. Fitzgerald, and I’m glad he put it in three parts so that it is visible longer and is bite-sized reading.
Kiel says
An excellent article about the time of the Mandate and the latest folly by Smilin’ Jimmie. – The “West-Bank” and preferably Gaza should be “annexed” immediately. There’s no solution containing a one- or two-state or n-state. Morally and legally the Jewish State of Israel is Samaria, Golan, Galilee, Judea, and Idumea.
ibrahim itace muhammed says
fitzgerald,you are not a court of competent jurisdiction to read down a binding resolution no. 242 passed pursuant to un charter.it is a settled position of the law,particularly international law,that the intention of lawmakers is infered from the text of the law ,not to import meaning outside the body of the law.resolution 242 explicitly states that israel shall push back to pre-1967 borders.for mr fitzgerald to interprete the phrase”secured and defensible” to meant that israel could retain some part of the the captured territories to secure and defend its borders amounts to reading down(ignoring)and infraction of resolution no.242 which clearly and uambigously provides that israel shall push back to pre-1967 borders.words of lord caradon who drafted the resolution no.242 cannot stand in place of plain language of the resolution, simple.to conclude otherwise will be no more than a folklore.thus, fitzgerald’s theory that it is lord caradon’s words, not the body of the resolution, to be relied upon is mere folklore not legal.the evil zionist state of israel,therefore,cannot hide behind lord caradon’s folklore to continue holding captured territories it considers strategic to secure and defend its borders.such claim is lame and lacks legal basis under un charter and resolution no.242 made pursuant to it.jimmy carter is simply saying israel should comply with the resolution 242 for the sake of peace.you idiot ,fitzgerald,you are saying israel should not comply and the conflicts continue.jews insist that the american taxpayers’s money must continue to be channelled to sustain its endless conflicts with arab and muslims over these capture territories.i know arabs and muslim nations will never give up to their rights over these captured territories no matter how long it takes.the americans will be then endlessly bearing the costs in addition to loss of good relations with muslim world that may harm american economy.i know many muslim nations are now considering withdrawing their assets of over $3 trillions from the united states to more friendly nations not under evil jewish control
Wellington says
You are wrong. 242 allows for defensible borders for Israel. As for Muslim nations withdrawing whatever from the US, I hope they do so that America’s ties to Muslim states is even further reduced after the worst President in American history leaves office come January 20th.
Respecting evil, look to the Islamic faith as the “finest” and oldest ideology on earth, easily coming in #1 here. Islam is a mortal enemy of liberty, equality under the law and other wonderful things like music, fine beer, romantic love and, in general, human happiness. In short, Islam stinks. And this metaphorical stench starts with Mohammed, who was a psychopath, a narcissist, a fraud and a pedophile, among so many other negatives. As for the Koran, which I have read in its entirety, it is highly repetitive, desultory, full of hate, devoid of love, sometimes just plain stupid and, in general, like Islam itself and the horrible man it holds up as the Model Man, a total sham.
Now stick it where the sun never shines. Done here.
gravenimage says
Fine post, Wellington.
Angemon says
+1
JIMJFOX says
Concise, accurate, 100% true.
Our muslim troll follows his ‘party line’ laid down by the Prophet of Psychopathy as demonstrated by his phrase “the evil zionist state of israel”.
ONE state solution- ISRAEL. Fully backed and guaranteed by USA under Trump.
A Harris USA says
Amen. Israel is the only nation that belongs in Israel!! The roaming Jordanians need to go back there… I am sure the good citizens of Israel sleep sounder at night, knowing that Trump will be in office Jan 20, 2017. They are marking the days on the calendar….
Champ says
Time to ban this senseless hater and creep “ibrahim itace muhammed” …
gravenimage says
Champ, the only positive thing this vicious Muslim troll does is expose the vicious Muslim mind set.
gravenimage says
Muslim apologist for savagery ibrahim itace muhammed wrote:
fitzgerald,you (sic) are not a court of competent jurisdiction to read down a binding resolution no. 242 passed pursuant to un (sic) charter.
…………………………
Of course, Hugh Fitzgerald is not claiming here that he represents the United Nations, nor that he is here handing down a binding resolution.
What he is doing here is offering an opinion–a very well reasoned and erudite opinion, but still no more than that. It should surprise no one that a Muslim is incapable of grasping the concept of freedom of speech.
More:
it (sic) is a settled position of the law,particularly (sic) international law,that (sic) the intention of lawmakers is infered (sic) from the text of the law ,not (sic) to import meaning outside the body of the law.resolution (sic) 242 explicitly states that israel (sic) shall push back to pre-1967 borders.
…………………………
There are two parts to this resolution. The second part states:
“(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.”
Of course, every surrounding Muslim state has repeatedly violated that clause, threatening Israel, funding Jihad terror, and attacking outright.
More:
The phrase”secured and defensible” to meant that israel (sic) could retain some part of the the captured territories to secure and defend its borders amounts to reading down(ignoring)and (sic) infraction of resolution no.242 which clearly and uambigously (sic) provides that israel (sic) shall push back to pre-1967 borders.words (sic) of lord (sic) caradon (sic) who drafted the resolution no.242 cannot stand in place of plain language of the resolution, simple.to (sic) conclude otherwise will be no more than a (sic) folklore.thus, (sic) fitzgerald’s (sic) theory that it is lord (sic) caradon’s (sic) words, not the body of the resolution, to be relied upon is mere folklore not legal.
…………………………
Were the idea of Israel’s borders being defensible irrelevant, of course, then this resolution would not be a blueprint for peace in the region, but instead for the complete destruction of Israel.
This is, of course, just what this Mohammedan hopes for–and is what the “Palestinian Authority” calls for.
More:
the (sic) evil zionist (sic) state of israel,therefore,cannot (sic) hide behind lord (sic) caradon’s (sic) folklore to continue holding captured territories it considers strategic to secure and defend its borders.such (sic) claim is lame and lacks legal basis under un (sic) charter and resolution no.242 made pursuant to it.jimmy (sic) carter (sic) is simply saying israel (sic) should comply with the resolution 242 for the sake of peace.
…………………………
Muslims have violated this resolution since the beginning, and will not stop now, as muhammed knows. They will continue to attack Israel.
In light of that, note what muhammed is positing here: that for the sake of “peace”, that Israel should not have defensible borders. In other words, the only thing that will secure “peace” in the region is the destruction of Israel and mass-slaughter of her people.
That is, indeed, the Islamic concept of “peace” in a nutshell.
More:
you (sic) idiot ,fitzgerald,you (sic) are saying israel (sic) should not comply and the conflicts continue.jews (sic) insist that the american taxpayers’s money must continue to be channelled (sic) to sustain its endless conflicts with arab (sic) and muslims (sic) over these capture (sic) territories.i (sic) know arabs (sic) and muslim (sic) nations will never give up to their rights over these captured territories no matter how long it takes.
…………………………
Of course, the idea that Muslims are attacking Israel over the “captured territories” is, of course, ridiculous. What were they attacking her for pre-1967? The stated intent of Muslims is to destroy Israel outright–a return to pre-1967 borders would just enable this destruction–it is not a Muslim goal in and of itself, any more than Israel’s ceding of Gaza was.
And it is absurd that muhammed refers to “arabs and muslim nations”, since all Arabs in the region–save those in Israel–are under the Muslim heel.
More:
the (sic) americans (sic) will be then endlessly bearing the costs in addition to loss of good relations with muslim (sic) world that may harm american (sic) economy.
…………………………
Grimly hilarious. Muslims seek the destruction of the United States just as they do Israel. The idea that we have “good relations” with any of these Jihad-terrorism enabling states is just grotesque.
More:
i (sic) know many muslim (sic) nations are now considering withdrawing their assets of over $3 trillions (sic) from the united (sic) states (sic) to more friendly nations not under evil jewish (sic) control
…………………………
Really, muhammed here cannot even keep his story straight. For the past several days he has been posting that when Trump deports the entire Muslim population of the United States–something he has never said he will do–that they will supposedly take $3 trillion in assets with them, which will allegedly bankrupt America. Given how many Muslims are on the dole, this is of course ridiculous.
It is even more absurd given how much Muslims *cost* us in security, prison costs, and terrorism. We would actually profit from their leaving.
I suppose muhammed finally realized how absurd these claims were, and is now claiming that this phantom $3 trillion is investments from Muslim nations.
The fact is that the entire West would be safer, more secure, and wealthier if we no longer had to deal with violent Muslims.
Angemon says
Hi there, Ebionite. Mr. Fitzgerald forgot more about the English language than you’ll ever learn, even if you live to be 999 years old. Who are you to say he’s not competent to read and interpret the 242 resolution?
Gee says
Wow talk about not competent – that would be you,
First it is a NON-BINDING resolution. So no it is not international law, nor is it legal period.
It clearly states the exact OPPOSITE of what you claim. Nice try but the authors (all of them) state you are a liar
Gee says
The UN does not write international laws, nor do they pass them. That is why they are called RESOLUTIONS and not laws.
Only UN Security Council Resolutions passed under Chapter VII of the UN Charter are “legally binding” according to the UN Charter.
Here is a complete list of every single UNSC Resolution passed under Chapter VII that concerns Israel or even mentions Israel.
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
Yup that is the entire list.
Now for every single legal claim that the Islamofascist colonists have to any land west of the Jordan River.
\1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
Yup that is the entire list as well.
Try and refute anything I wrote. Your entire argument is false from start to finish
Custos Custodum says
Genesis marks out Israel’s wider strategic space in terms that remain strikingly valid in the 21st century:
ibrahim itace muhammed says
wellington,it seems you don’t under my line of arguement.”defensible” border does not mean that israel can retain parts of the captured territories to serve as strategic positions in order to secure and defend its borders of pre-1967.the text of resolution 242 does not say so even if lord caradon think in that line of arguement. i said import such meaning into the plain language of the resolution is not tenable in law.the internationally recognised rules of interpretation do not allow that.if lord caradon wants import such meaning the resolution 242 has to be amended to add a proviso or subsection to capture it.in the absence of such amendment the position of things under resolution 242 still remains that israeli’s borders remains that of pre-1967. for you to understand my line of arguement i refer you to stark on international law.let us keep sentiments aside and address the issue objectively with proper understanding of international law position on the matter.
gravenimage says
Why pussyfoot around? Like all “good” Muslims, muhammed seeks the destruction of Israel; that is why he wants to ensure that she does not have defensible borders.
Wellington says
Seconding gravenimage, why indeed pussyfoot around, ibrahim? You have already demonstrated with zero doubt that your moral compass is completely broken by way of your silly “under evil jewish {sic} control” remark.
Yes, Israel, the only truly free country in the Middle East, where Muslims have more freedoms than in any majority-Muslim nation on earth, since Islam an eternal enemy of freedom, is “the evil one.” Oh yeah right, you monumental doofus.
Do you even begin to comprehend not only why you personally, but the Islamic world in general, is with every passing day met with more scorn and disgust by the vast majority in the West? Do you even begin to get any of this?
And, once again, screw Islam, screw Mohammed and screw the Koran. A malevolent trinity if ever there were one. No doubt.
A.T.Halmay says
The peanut farmer was an irrelevancy as president and continued to be irrelevant for the rest of his life.
Cretius says
Carter is another leftist useful idiot. He should stick to peanut farming. He has no knowledge of the history of the region or of security requirements.
Capitalist-Dad says
Apparently Carter is peeved that his position as most useless president is about to be overtaken by Obama. The solution is to come out with some really dumb statements, but it’s too late. Obama has secured his legacy as worst president ever–although Carter still will hold the record for farsical.
Schrödinger says
Islam is primarily the worship of hatred. Its zenith, Jew hatred — virulent, immutable, genocidal Jew hatred — is one of the appalling cult’s real pillars.
The most indispensable, top of the to do list, is Jihad. *
It’s official Five Pillars, as burdensome and befitting of this loathsome and totalitarian ideology as they be, evidence how muhammad himself often found it expedient to seem a bit more politically correct. Voided of the violence, horror and terror of Hudud punishments and violent Jihad, islam would have long been simply laughed out of existence.
Read the Koran, Jimmy.
*From footnotes on the Book of Jihad, Sahih Bukhari, followed by verse 2785 of the same happy, little book:
(1) Al-Jihad (Holy fighting) in Allah’s Cause (with full force of numbers and weaponry),is given the utmost importance in Islam, and is one of its pillars (on which it stands). By Jihad Islam is established, Allah’s Word is made superior. [His Word being (La ilãha il/allah which means none has the right to be worshipped but Alläh)J, and His religion (Islam) is propagated. By abandoning Jihad, (may Allah protect us from that). Islam and the Muslims fall into an inferior position, their honour is lost, their land is stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam, on every Muslim, and he who tries to escape from this duty or does not in his innermost heart wish to fulfil this duty, dies with one of the qualities of a hypocrite.
2785; Narrated Abu Hurairah c ii A man came to Allah’s Messenger and said, “Guide me to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward).” He replied, “I do not find such a deed.”