Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Operation Focus

Operation Focus, also known as Operation Moked, was the Israeli Air Force's preemptive airstrike operation conducted on June 5, 1967, at the start of the , targeting , Jordanian, Syrian, and Iraqi air assets to neutralize the threat of aerial bombardment against . The operation involved deploying nearly all of 's 196 combat aircraft in coordinated low-altitude waves beginning at 7:45 AM, with pilots maintaining to preserve surprise, striking 11 initial airfields and destroying 197 planes on the ground in the first wave alone. This rapid execution crippled Egypt's air force, which lost over 200 aircraft within the first hour, enabling to achieve complete air superiority across the theater within five hours and facilitating decisive ground advances. The planning for Operation Focus emphasized , gathering, and measures, drawing on years of and simulations to map enemy airfield layouts and predict responses, while operations masked preparations amid escalating Arab mobilizations and blockades. Execution proceeded in multiple waves, with subsequent strikes expanding to Jordanian, Syrian, and even Iraqi targets like the H-3 airfield, ultimately destroying approximately 400 enemy aircraft total—452 across the Arab forces—while shutting down six airports and inflicting minimal losses of 19 planes in the initial phase. This outcome, achieved through superior training, precise timing exploiting routines, and overwhelming commitment of resources (leaving only 12 planes for home defense), marked one of the most effective air campaigns in , decisively shifting the war's momentum by denying adversaries and .

Background and Strategic Context

Escalating Tensions in 1967

In the spring of 1967, border clashes between and intensified, exacerbating regional instability. On April 7, a skirmish escalated into a major air battle over the , during which forces shot down six Syrian MiG-21 aircraft without loss. Syrian shelling of villages from elevated positions continued, prompting artillery retaliation on May 12–13 against Syrian artillery sites and military positions. publicly warned of potential ground invasion if attacks persisted, heightening fears of broader conflict. These incidents prompted erroneous Soviet intelligence reports on May 13 claiming was concentrating forces for an imminent invasion of , despite no such occurring. Egyptian President , responding to Syrian appeals and seeking to bolster his pan-Arab leadership, ordered the Egyptian army's to the on May 16, deploying seven divisions and expelling (UNEF) observers from the area by May 19. This rapid buildup, involving over 100,000 troops and hundreds of tanks, transformed a defensive posture into an offensive threat along 's southern border. Tensions peaked on when Nasser announced the closure of the Straits of Tiran to Israeli-flagged vessels and ships carrying cargo to or from , effectively blockading the and severing 's access to the . This action contravened international maritime agreements established after the 1956 , which had guaranteed free passage through the straits, and Israeli leaders regarded it as a equivalent to a . Concurrently, Nasser and other leaders issued public threats of 's destruction; for instance, Nasser declared in a speech that forces aimed to achieve "the restoration of rights" through confrontation, while Syrian officials echoed calls for 's annihilation. These developments, amid mutual defense pacts forming between , , and , created an existential encirclement perceived by as imminent aggression.

Egyptian Mobilization and Threats

In response to reports of Israeli troop concentrations near the Syrian border—later attributed to Soviet misinformation—Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser ordered the mobilization of Egyptian forces on May 14, 1967, initiating a large-scale deployment to the Sinai Peninsula. This included the movement of two infantry divisions toward the Israeli border, with reserves adding over 100,000 personnel to Egypt's active forces, estimated at around 200,000 by mid-May. By May 20, approximately 60,000 Egyptian troops had entered Sinai, increasing to 85,000 within two days, forming defensive lines along the frontier. Ultimately, Egypt concentrated seven divisions—comprising roughly 100,000 troops, 900 tanks, and extensive artillery—in the region by late May, positioning them in forward areas that suggested offensive potential rather than purely defensive posture. Concurrently, on May 18, 1967, Egypt demanded the withdrawal of the (UNEF), which had maintained a buffer presence in and since 1957 to prevent cross-border incursions. UN Secretary-General acceded to the request, leading to the rapid evacuation of UNEF personnel from Egyptian territory, thereby removing the international peacekeeping barrier along the armistice lines. This action, combined with the troop buildup, heightened Israeli perceptions of imminent threat, as Sinai's demilitarized status under prior agreements was effectively nullified. Nasser's public rhetoric amplified these military moves, framing them as preparation for confrontation. On May 23, addressing troops in , he declared, "The Jews threatened war. We tell them: You are welcome, we are ready for war," while announcing the closure of the Straits of Tiran to Israeli-flagged vessels and those carrying strategic materials to , blockading the and severing a vital supply route. Earlier statements included vows to enter " with its soil saturated in blood" and invitations for to initiate conflict, signaling intent for total victory rather than deterrence. The , enacted on May 22 via naval forces, was condemned internationally as an act of aggression equivalent to , exacerbating the crisis despite Egypt's denial of aggressive aims.

Israeli Intelligence Assessments

Israeli , directed by (the IDF's intelligence directorate), assessed the Egyptian military buildup in the following President Nasser's mobilization order on May 16, 1967, as comprising seven infantry divisions, three mechanized brigades, and substantial armored forces totaling around 1,000 tanks, deployed in forward positions that enabled rapid offensive maneuvers despite Cairo's claims of defensive intent. Initial evaluations, drawn from limited advance warning—only hours for the initial troop movements—viewed the escalation as a political maneuver likely to culminate in withdrawal after demonstrating resolve, underestimating Nasser's commitment to confrontation. However, subsequent and refined these views, confirming concentrations vulnerable to preemption, particularly in air power, where Egyptian squadrons were parked in predictable, clustered formations at bases such as Inshas, Abu Suweir, and Almaza. Aman estimated the Air Force at approximately 420 operational combat , including MiG-21s, Su-7s, and bombers, outnumbering Israel's roughly 200 serviceable jets and posing the decisive threat to ground operations in . Assessments highlighted the ' overall aerial superiority—Egypt alone fielding over twice Israel's strength—and warned that pilots, on heightened alert, maintained on the ground during daylight hours, creating a narrow window for surprise strikes before dispersal or sorties could complicate dominance. This tactical intelligence, corroborated by photo-reconnaissance flights revealing exact layouts and parking, underscored the feasibility of destroying up to 80% of 's air force in initial waves, provided Israel acted preemptively to avert coordinated air responses. By late May, as Egyptian forces fortified positions and Nasser expelled UN peacekeepers while threatening the Straits of Tiran, Aman's analyses shifted toward probabilistic scenarios, estimating that prolonged standoffs would erode Israel's air edge through attrition and Arab acclimation, with each passing day reducing odds of securing uncontested skies essential for armored advances. These evaluations, while accurate on deployments and vulnerabilities, reflected over-reliance on the notion of Nasser's bluff, a misjudgment rooted in historical patterns of saber-rattling without full invasion; yet they correctly prioritized air neutralization as causal to ground success, directly shaping the doctrinal basis for Operation Focus.

Planning and Operational Design

Development of the Focus Plan

The development of Operation Focus, or Mivtza Moked in Hebrew, began in the aftermath of the 1956 , with initial concepts for preemptive airfield strikes refined by (IAF) planners in the early 1960s. , IAF commander from 1958 to 1966, played a central role in formulating the core strategy, emphasizing surprise attacks on enemy airbases to neutralize superior Arab air numbers—approximately 600 combat aircraft against Israel's roughly 200. Practice missions were conducted repeatedly against mock Egyptian airfields in Israel's Desert, honing low-altitude flight paths (as low as 50 feet to evade ), , and precise targeting of runways, parked aircraft, and infrastructure. As forces mobilized in the in May 1967 under President , IAF intelligence assessments confirmed that Egyptian aircraft remained dispersed on open aprons with minimal dispersal or hardened shelters, presenting a narrow window for decisive action before an anticipated Arab offensive. The plan evolved to involve nearly the entire IAF combat fleet in coordinated waves: the first wave targeting 11 Egyptian airfields simultaneously at dawn on , using specialized "" bombs to crater runways and prevent scrambles, followed by rapid sorties against fighters, bombers, and control centers. Key decisions included timing the initial strike for 7:45 a.m. Egyptian time to exploit morning fog dissipation and catch pilots during breakfast routines, while reserving a small reserve force for air defense over . Under IAF Commander Mordechai , Weizman's successor appointed in 1966, the plan was finalized and rehearsed intensively in late May 1967 amid escalating threats, including Egypt's blockade of the Straits of Tiran on May 22. coordinated with and, after Moshe Dayan's appointment as defense minister on , secured political approval for the preemptive , prioritizing air superiority to enable ground advances in , the , and . The strategy drew on years of accumulated from reconnaissance flights and human sources, underscoring the IAF's emphasis on rapid turnaround—refueling and rearming in under eight minutes compared to Egypt's estimated eight hours.

Key Personnel and Resources

Maj. Gen. , Chief of the (IAF), served as the primary commander overseeing Operation Focus, coordinating the preemptive airstrikes against Egyptian airfields and briefing pilots on their objectives in the hours before launch on June 5, 1967. The operational concept originated from earlier planning by , Hod's predecessor as IAF commander, who advocated for a decisive knockout blow against superior Arab air forces through concentrated preemption. The IAF allocated nearly its entire combat aircraft inventory to the operation, deploying approximately 188 of 200 available fighters in the opening waves while reserving 12 for homeland defense against potential counterattacks. These included French-origin jets such as the interceptors for high-speed penetration and escort, fighter-bombers for low-level strikes, and attack aircraft, with the latter numbering 25 in the pre-war fleet for bombing and strafing roles. Additional types encompassed older Sud Ouragan and platforms repurposed for ground-attack missions, supported by limited and assets to maximize sortie endurance. Ground resources emphasized rapid turnaround at Israeli bases like Ramat David and Hatzor, enabling multiple waves within hours despite the strain on maintenance crews.

Deception and Timing Strategies

Israeli military planners employed multiple layers of deception to mask offensive preparations and foster a of defensive amid escalating tensions. Public statements by Defense Minister emphasized diplomatic efforts over military action, while thousands of reservists were sent home on leave during the preceding weekend to simulate normalcy and reduce visible mobilization. (IAF) leaders, including Chief of Staff , maintained routine schedules, with public appearances suggesting restraint. Additionally, routine training flights over Israeli territory and the Mediterranean followed routes similar to planned strike paths, conditioning Arab observers to dismiss them as non-threatening. A diversionary IAF demonstration near the blockaded port of Sharm el-Sheikh redeployed Egyptian fighters southward, thinning defenses over key airfields. Radio deception further obscured intentions: prior to the strikes, propeller-driven trainers simulated jet fighter communications to enable covert maintenance of combat aircraft, while on the morning of the attack, similar masked the assembly of strike packages. During the operation itself, pilots flew at ultra-low altitudes with strict —no transmissions during takeoff, en route, or in emergencies until after initial bomb drops—to evade radar detection and early warning. These measures ensured the Egyptian Air Force (EAF) remained unprepared, despite intelligence indicating attack risks. Timing was calibrated for maximum surprise and vulnerability: pilots received final briefings around 4:00 AM on June 5, 1967, with the first wave launching precisely at 7:45 AM, after dawn fog dissipated but before full EAF alertness. This exploited Arab pilots at breakfast or in "dawn patrol" parked on tarmacs, avoiding an anticipated pre-dawn assault that might prompt dispersal. The delay allowed forces to complete —concentrating for easier targeting—while secrecy prevented preemptive Arab strikes. Subsequent waves followed within hours, extending to Syrian and Jordanian targets by 11:30 AM, securing rapid air superiority.

Execution of the Strikes

First Wave Against Airfields

At 07:45 on 5 June 1967, the initiated the first wave of Operation Focus by deploying nearly all of its 196 combat , reserving only 12 for air defense over , to strike 11 airfields across and the simultaneously. The operation exploited the element of , targeting planes on the ground during refueling and maintenance, when most pilots were asleep or unprepared, and runways were cluttered with . Israeli pilots approached the targets at low altitudes to penetrate gaps in Egyptian radar coverage, flying from unexpected directions such as over the and from the west, rather than the anticipated east. Strikes were conducted in small formations of four each, with successive arriving every few minutes to maximize disruption; initial attacks cratered runways using special penetrating bombs to immobilize remaining , followed by runs with cannons and rockets against parked planes, fuel depots, and control towers. This tactic prevented effective Egyptian scrambles, as the timing—mid-morning rather than dawn—coincided with Cairo's rush-hour traffic jams, delaying ground alerts and responses. The first wave, lasting approximately 80 minutes, destroyed around 204 Egyptian —representing half of their operational fleet—including a significant portion of bombers (about 80%) and fighter jets (about 55%)—while rendering most targeted airfields inoperable for hours or days. losses in this phase were minimal, with primarily threatened by ground fire rather than aerial intercepts, enabling rapid rearming for subsequent waves within minutes. Key targets included major bases like Cairo West and Inshas, where heavy bombers such as Tu-16s were systematically eliminated after runway strikes.

Follow-Up Waves and Expansion to Other Fronts

Following the first wave of strikes at 7:45 a.m. on June 5, 1967, which targeted 11 airfields and destroyed 197 while cratering runways to prevent takeoffs, the executed a second wave approximately two hours later. This follow-up focused on 14 additional airfields, radar installations, and sites to neutralize remaining threats and ensure comprehensive denial of air operations. A brief 10-minute interval preceded the second assault, allowing pilots to refuel and rearm before resuming attacks that extended over 170 minutes total against targets. These operations crippled Egypt's , with subsequent waves destroying an estimated 293 to 304 , including all Tu-16 and Il-28 bombers as well as 185 fighters, primarily on the ground. Low-altitude runs using machine guns, rockets, and bombs minimized Israeli losses to 19 during the Egyptian phase, enabling rapid turnaround of the nearly 200 combat planes committed to the effort. With Egyptian air power neutralized by midday, Operation Focus expanded to Jordanian and Syrian fronts later on June 5. Jordan's entry into the conflict, triggered by artillery barrages on based on erroneous reports of Egyptian successes, prompted Israeli strikes starting around noon that obliterated Jordan's entire fleet of 28 aircraft at multiple bases, including and . Syrian airfields faced attacks from 11:30 a.m., redirected after Syrian jets struck positions; these sorties destroyed 57 —about two-thirds of Syria's operational —through similar ground-targeting tactics with minimal opposition. This phase, alongside a limited strike on Iraq's H-3 base to preempt reinforcements, secured air superiority across multiple theaters within hours, totaling around 400 Arab lost on the first day.

Tactical Innovations and Challenges

Operation Focus employed several tactical innovations to maximize surprise and minimize detection. Israeli approached airfields by flying low over the at altitudes as low as 30-100 meters to evade , before climbing for bombing runs and then descending again for attacks. This low-level penetration tactic reduced the effective and allowed strikes to commence without prior warning to forces. Additionally, the operation prioritized cratering with specialized bombs to disable takeoff capabilities, followed by immediate attacks on parked using machine guns and rockets, limiting each plane to a single quick pass per target to avoid anti-aircraft fire concentration. Coordination was enhanced through precise timing and , with waves launched in rapid succession—every combat aircraft committed in the first three waves between 07:45 and 08:30 on June 5, 1967—ensuring simultaneous hits across 18 bases to overwhelm defenses before reinforcements could respond. This all-in commitment, leaving only 12 fighters for home defense, represented a high-risk innovation in massed preemptive striking, forgoing traditional force reserves for overwhelming initial impact. Deception elements included simulating routine patrols to mask preparations, further preserving the element of surprise critical to grounding over 300 planes. Challenges included the physical demands of low-altitude flight, which increased risks from terrain collision, errors, and during high-speed, low-visibility ingress over water. Fuel limitations dictated strict adherence to timetables, with allocated minimal loiter time—typically 7-9 minutes per —necessitating flawless execution to return before reserves depleted, as mid-air refueling was unavailable. Egyptian anti- artillery posed immediate threats during attack runs, contributing to the loss of 19 Israeli in the opening strikes, often from ground fire after the surprise element partially dissipated in later waves. A key operational hurdle was the potential for Arab to scramble; while most were caught on the ground, approximately 30 planes managed takeoffs, engaging forces in dogfights that tested pilot skill and underscored vulnerabilities in achieving total immobilization. The rapid turnaround for follow-on waves strained maintenance crews and pilots, who flew up to seven sorties in 12 hours, amplifying error risks amid the absence of defensive reserves against possible counterstrikes. Despite these, adaptations like varying attack patterns mitigated predictable losses, enabling the operation's overall success in securing air superiority.

Immediate Results and Losses

Arab Aircraft Destroyed by Type and Nation

Operation Focus, launched on , 1967, resulted in the destruction of 401 Arab aircraft over the initial two days of the , primarily through preemptive strikes on airfields while most were on the ground. Egyptian losses were the heaviest at 302 aircraft, crippling their operational capacity from the outset. These figures encompass fighters, bombers, transports, and helicopters across multiple nations, as detailed in a U.S. Army analysis of the campaign. The breakdown by nation and type highlights the comprehensive neutralization of Arab air power:
NationTypeNumber Destroyed
MiG-2195
MiG-1920
MiG-15/1782
Su-710
Il-28 (bombers)27
Tu-16 (bombers)30
Transports (Il-14, An-12)32
Helicopters6
Egypt Total302
Hawker Hunters21
Jordan Total21
MiG-2132
MiG-15/1723
Il-28 (bombers)2
Transports (Mi-4)3
Syria Total60
MiG-219
Hawker Hunters7
Tu-16 (bombers)1
Iraq Total17
Hawker Hunter1
Lebanon Total1
Grand Total401
All data from Table 2 in a U.S. Army study on the air campaign. Jordanian losses occurred in afternoon strikes on after neutralization, while Syrian and were targeted in subsequent waves, including the H-3 airfield in . These destructions, mostly on the ground due to surprise and precise low-level attacks, ensured Israeli throughout the conflict.

Israeli Aircraft and Personnel Losses

During the preemptive airstrikes of Operation Focus on June 5, 1967, the (IAF) lost 19 , primarily bombers and fighter-bombers engaged in low-level attacks on airfields. These losses occurred mainly due to intense anti-aircraft artillery (AAA) fire from defenses, supplemented by operational accidents such as mechanical failures and crashes during hasty returns to base under fuel constraints. No IAF were downed in aerial combat during the initial waves, as Arab forces were largely surprised and their planes caught on the ground. Personnel casualties included five pilots killed and five captured, with the fatalities resulting from the same hits and accidents that claimed the aircraft. The IAF's rapid execution—over 300 sorties in the first two hours—minimized exposure despite the risks of operating nearly its entire fleet in vulnerable, unescorted formations. These losses, while significant relative to Israel's limited air assets (about 200 combat aircraft total), were offset by the destruction of over 300 Arab planes in the same period, securing tactical dominance.

Quantitative Assessment of Waves

![Destroyed Egyptian planes on the ground]float-right Operation Focus unfolded in three successive waves on the morning of June 5, 1967, enabling the (IAF) to neutralize the bulk of the Air Force within hours. The first wave, launched at 0745 Israeli time, committed nearly the entire IAF operational fleet of approximately 183-200 combat to low-altitude strikes on 11 airfields across and the . This assault, executed in under an hour of active strikes, destroyed 197-204 on the ground, representing roughly half of 's combat-ready fleet, while IAF losses totaled 19 , mainly from ground fire. The second wave, initiated around 0930, involved about 164 sorties redirected against surviving targets after rapid refueling and rearming of returning . It inflicted further devastation, destroying an additional 107-113 planes, bringing the cumulative toll from the first two waves to over 310 eliminated in approximately three hours. attrition remained limited, with the operation's high sortie generation rate—enabled by pre-positioned fuel and meticulous planning—allowing multiple missions per despite the intense pace. The third wave, commencing near 1215, shifted focus to residual assets and initial strikes on Jordanian and Syrian airfields, though with fewer dedicated sorties as air superiority over was secured. By day's end, these waves contributed to the destruction of 452 Arab overall, against just 46 IAF losses for the . The waves' quantitative success is evident in the destruction-to-loss ratio exceeding 10:1 in initial phases, achieved via surprise, radar evasion, and airfield saturation tactics that minimized Arab response.
WaveApproximate Sorties/AircraftPrimary TargetsArab Aircraft DestroyedIAF Losses (Wave-Specific)
First183-200 aircraft11 197-204 19 total (mostly this wave)
Second164 sortiesRemaining 107-113 Minimal
ThirdNot precisely quantified; follow-onResidual , /Contributed to daily total of ~452Minimal

Strategic and Operational Impact

Securing Air Supremacy

The success of Operation Focus on June 5, 1967, rapidly translated into unchallenged Israeli control of the airspace over the Sinai Peninsula, Jordan, and Syria, fundamentally altering the aerial balance of power. By 07:45 that morning, Israeli Air Force (IAF) squadrons had initiated preemptive strikes against Egyptian airfields, destroying over 300 Egyptian aircraft—primarily MiG-21s, Su-7s, and bombers—while they were still on the ground, with minimal Arab radar detection or response due to synchronized deception tactics and low-altitude approaches. This initial wave neutralized approximately 75% of Egypt's operational air strength within hours, preventing any significant Egyptian sorties and leaving the Israeli skies free from enemy bombers that could have targeted advancing ground forces. Follow-up strikes extended the dominance to Jordanian and Syrian air forces later that day, destroying around 50 Jordanian aircraft at bases like and , and over 50 Syrian planes at fields near , ensuring no coordinated Arab aerial counteroffensive could materialize. With Arab air forces reduced to scattered remnants incapable of sustained operations—Egypt's total losses exceeding 400 aircraft by war's end—the IAF achieved near-total air superiority, defined as the degree of dominance permitting operations without prohibitive interference from enemy aviation. This superiority was quantified by the IAF's ability to conduct over 2,000 sorties in the subsequent days without meaningful opposition, a feat corroborated by post-war analyses of airfield wreckage and pilot debriefs. The secured enabled unrestricted for ground operations, such as pinpointing Egyptian tank concentrations in and disrupting Syrian artillery on the , directly contributing to territorial gains without the attrition of aerial dogfights or bombing runs on positions. Unlike prior conflicts where air forces contested control, the one-sided destruction shifted the theater to initiative, with Arab commanders unable to leverage their numerical advantages in due to command disarray and fuel shortages post-strikes. losses remained limited to 19 aircraft in the opening assaults, primarily from ground fire, underscoring the operational asymmetry achieved.

Influence on Ground Operations

The attainment of air superiority on June 5, 1967, through the destruction of approximately 338 Egyptian aircraft out of 425 in under four hours allowed the (IAF) to shift focus to supporting ground operations without contest from enemy aircraft. This enabled unrestricted (), interdiction of supply lines, and , which protected advancing (IDF) units from aerial threats and facilitated coordinated maneuvers across fronts. By June 6, the IAF had flown over 1,000 sorties, targeting Egyptian armor, fortifications, and troop concentrations, thereby accelerating IDF breakthroughs. In the , proved instrumental in the rapid collapse of Egyptian defenses, as divisions under commanders like advanced toward the unimpeded by Egyptian air reconnaissance or strikes. At key battles such as Abu Ageila on June 5-6, initial ground assaults succeeded largely through and armor despite limited immediate due to the nighttime timing, but subsequent IAF strikes disrupted Egyptian reinforcements and supply routes, contributing to the rout of seven Egyptian divisions and the capture of over 5,000 prisoners. This aerial dominance reduced casualties, amplified enemy losses, and enabled flanking maneuvers by units under Avraham Yoffe and , securing the peninsula by June 10. On the Jordanian front in the from June 5-7, IAF operations neutralized Jordanian aircraft, shielding IDF ground forces during advances toward and preventing disruptions to reserve mobilizations. Similarly, in the campaign on June 9-10, the destruction of 59 Syrian aircraft supported swift IDF assaults, routing Syrian positions without aerial interference. Overall, the absence of Arab air power demoralized enemy troops, who faced relentless bombing and lacked defensive air cover, transforming potential protracted engagements into decisive ground victories across theaters.

Broader Effects on Arab Coalitions

The destruction of approximately 300 Egyptian aircraft on June 5, 1967, during Operation Focus effectively neutralized the aerial component of the pan-Arab , which had led since establishing a joint Arab command structure in 1964. This , encompassing , , , and to a lesser extent , relied on Egyptian air power for offensive coordination against ; its sudden loss left Arab ground forces vulnerable without or , exacerbating pre-existing command disarray and preventing unified maneuvers across fronts. Jordan's premature entry into the war later that day stemmed from fabricated Egyptian reports of inflicting heavy damage on Israeli air assets, prompting King Hussein to shell Israeli positions and commit his forces despite initial reluctance; the subsequent Israeli strikes that destroyed much of Jordan's air force—around 28 aircraft—further isolated Amman, as Egyptian leadership failed to provide promised support or accurate intelligence. Syria, meanwhile, limited its role to sporadic shelling from the Golan Heights until Israeli forces advanced on June 9, reflecting underlying rivalries with Nasser's Egypt that undermined joint operations; the coalition's inability to mount a synchronized response highlighted structural flaws, including conflicting national interests and inadequate interoperability. In the aftermath, the air campaign's success accelerated the fragmentation of Arab alliances, eroding Nasser's prestige as pan-Arab leader and exposing the coalition's operational fragility, which precluded further large-scale joint military efforts beyond the 1973 . Egypt shifted toward defensive attrition tactics and eventual U.S. alignment, Jordan prioritized internal stability over reconquest, and adopted a deterrence posture dependent on external coordination—doctrinal adaptations that underscored a broader retreat from unified confrontation with .

Controversies and Viewpoints

Israeli Defensive Rationale

Israel perceived the massive Egyptian military buildup in the , involving approximately 100,000 troops, seven infantry divisions, three mechanized divisions, and over 900 tanks by late May 1967, as an existential encirclement threatening imminent invasion. This deployment, coupled with the expulsion of the (UNEF) from the on May 16, 1967, removed a key buffer and signaled aggressive intent, as UNEF had maintained demilitarization since the 1956 . Israeli intelligence assessments indicated that Egyptian forces were positioned for a potential strike, exacerbating Israel's strategic vulnerability given its narrow territorial depth and inability to absorb initial Arab offensives. The closure of the Straits of Tiran to shipping on May 22, 1967, constituted a in Israel's view, violating the 1956 armistice understandings that guaranteed free passage, and effectively blockading the , Israel's vital outlet. Egyptian President escalated rhetoric, declaring on May 26, 1967, that Arab armies were "poised on the to face the challenge," while affirming intentions to confront and destroy the , statements interpreted by leaders as preludes to coordinated annihilation. Defense pacts signed between and on May 30, 1967, and Egypt's alignment with further unified Arab forces against , prompting fears of a multi-front . Operation Focus was rationalized as a necessary preemptive neutralization of air power to prevent devastating bombing campaigns on population centers, where the (IAF), though qualitatively superior, was quantitatively outnumbered by combined Egyptian, Syrian, and Jordanian squadrons. military doctrine emphasized rapid offensive action to seize initiative, as defensive postures risked attrition in a prolonged air war; simulations and intelligence suggested aircraft could inflict catastrophic civilian and infrastructure damage if allowed to strike first. The cabinet approved the operation on June 4, 1967, framing it as against an acute, gathering storm rather than unprovoked aggression, with and Chief of Staff citing the cumulative threats as justifying action to avert catastrophe. This rationale aligned with Israel's broader security paradigm of proactive measures against superior foes, prioritizing survival over international norms of restraint.

Arab Narratives of Aggression

In the immediate aftermath of Operation Focus on June 5, 1967, state media and official statements framed the air strikes as an unprovoked into sovereign territory, claiming robust defensive successes to counter the assault. Cairo Radio broadcast reports asserting that forces had intercepted over 100 , downing 60 in fierce dogfights while suffering minimal losses, portraying the operation as a failed Zionist incursion repelled by resolve. These assertions, disseminated to sustain public amid the shock of airfield devastations, emphasized Israel's role as the aggressor initiating hostilities without or prior border incursion by troops. As evidence of the near-total destruction of the Air Force—approximately 300 aircraft rendered inoperable—emerged over subsequent days, Arab narratives shifted to underscore the strikes' illegality under international norms, depicting them as a premeditated act of expansionist aggression exploiting regional tensions. President , in his June 9 resignation speech (later retracted amid public protests), acknowledged tactical errors but attributed the war's outbreak to Israeli initiative, stating that Egypt had sought no offensive action and that the aerial assault constituted the first aggressive move. and broader Arab diplomatic communications to the reinforced this view, demanding resolutions condemning for violating the United Arab Republic's sovereignty and framing the preemptive nature of as unjustifiable pretext rather than defensive necessity. In post-war Arab , Operation Focus is routinely characterized as emblematic of , initiating a that enabled territorial conquests under the guise of , while downplaying prior Egyptian mobilizations in and rhetorical threats from Nasser. Official accounts, such as those in military analyses, maintained that the strikes were disproportionate and opportunistic, ignoring Arab defensive postures, though these narratives have faced scrutiny for initial that eroded credibility when confronted with and eyewitness data confirming the scale of losses. This framing persists in some regional scholarship, attributing the war's dynamics to Zionist provocation rather than mutual escalations, despite empirical records of troop concentrations exceeding 100,000 near the border by early . invoked Article 51 of the UN Charter to justify Operation Focus as anticipatory against an imminent threat of armed attack, citing Egypt's expulsion of (UNEF) peacekeepers from the on May 16, 1967, the imposition of a naval blockade in the Straits of Tiran on May 22, 1967—which deemed an act of war disrupting its access to the —and the mobilization of approximately 100,000 Egyptian troops backed by 900 tanks in , coupled with Nasser's public declarations of intent to annihilate . These measures, argued, created a situation of necessity meeting the customary criteria for anticipatory action under , as articulated in the 1837 Caroline incident: the threat must be "instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation." Opponents, adhering to a strict textual reading of Article 51—which permits only "if an armed attack occurs"—classified the operation as an unlawful first prohibited by Article 2(4) of the Charter, equating it to rather than legitimate response. This perspective posits that pre-Charter customary allowances for anticipatory were superseded by the post-1945 framework emphasizing through the Security Council, rendering Israel's unilateral action a absent an ongoing or completed attack. Among legal scholars, views diverge sharply: those favoring a customary extension of , such as D.W. Bowett and subsequent analysts, contend the operation's stems from the objective imminence of Egyptian aggression, supported by intelligence indicating an within , thus preserving state survival without viable diplomatic alternatives. Conversely, strict constructionists, often dominant in post-Cold War academic discourse potentially influenced by institutional biases favoring over unilateral action, argue the absence of an actual incursion precludes , viewing the strike as initiating hostilities that enabled territorial gains later deemed inadmissible. The of Justice's 1986 Nicaragua judgment reinforced the "armed " threshold but left room for customary anticipatory norms, fueling ongoing debate without resolving the 1967 case definitively. Immediate UN responses reflected this division: the Security Council convened on June 5-6, 1967, but adopted no resolution declaring or ceasefire mandate attributing fault to Israel, amid U.S. support for its navigational rights and restraint appeals. The General Assembly's Resolution 2252 (ES-V) on July 4, 1967, affirmed inadmissibility of territory acquired by war but sidestepped the strike's initial legality, while Arab states and Soviet allies framed it as unprovoked in diplomatic forums. Subsequent analyses, including those questioning prolonged , often retroactively challenge the claim's temporal limits without disproving the acute threat's empirical basis in military preparations.

Legacy and Historical Analysis

Evaluations of Success Factors

The success of Operation Focus hinged on Israel's achievement of tactical surprise through a meticulously coordinated dawn , commencing at 07:45 on June 5, 1967, which caught vulnerable on the ground across 18 airfields. This timing exploited Arab forces' lax alert postures, as President and his commanders had ignored intelligence warnings and neglected to implement dispersal protocols, leaving hundreds of MiG-21s, Su-7s, and other jets parked wingtip-to-wingtip in predictable patterns. pilots flew low-altitude ingress routes—often below 100 feet—to evade early-warning radars, cratering runways with precision-guided munitions and follow-up runs before ground crews could respond effectively. Superior intelligence gathering underpinned the operation's precision, with reconnaissance flights, human sources, and signals intercepts providing detailed airfield layouts, inventories, and maintenance schedules that allowed for tailored strike packages. For instance, Unit 504's ground agents and aerial photo- mapped vulnerabilities like undefended revetments, enabling the destruction of 286 planes in the initial waves alone, with minimal losses of 19 to antiaircraft fire. This intelligence edge contrasted with Arab deficiencies, where radar operators dismissed anomalous readings as routine and command structures stifled decentralized alerts. Rigorous pre-war preparation amplified these advantages, as IAF commander oversaw months of simulations on mock airfields, pilot briefings with memorized target profiles, and logistical drills for rapid refueling—averaging 7-10 minutes per turnaround—to sustain four waves against before pivoting to Jordanian and Syrian targets. Highly trained pilots, many with combat experience from prior conflicts, executed with doctrinal focus on , prioritizing ground-attack over dogfights until enemy air threats were neutralized. operational shortcomings, including overreliance on Soviet that emphasized quantity over readiness and poor inter-service coordination, further tilted the scales, as evidenced by the failure to scramble even a fraction of serviceable despite the strikes' . Military analysts attribute the operation's outsized impact not solely to innovation but to a of these factors against adversaries hampered by political interference and complacency; for example, while Israel's 200 combat aircraft faced numerical inferiority, the first-strike doctrine—refined post-1956 Sinai Campaign—ensured near-total attrition of Egypt's 340-plane force within hours, securing uncontested skies for subsequent advances. This evaluation underscores causal realism in air power: preemption and execution quality outweighed material disparities, though Arab narratives often downplay internal failures in favor of alleging unprovoked aggression.

Lessons for Modern Air Power

Operation Focus exemplified the decisive impact of a well-executed preemptive in neutralizing an adversary's air capabilities, enabling rapid attainment of . On , 1967, the (IAF) launched simultaneous attacks on 18 airfields, destroying approximately 300 —mostly on the ground—in the initial hours, representing over 75% of Egypt's operational combat . This operation extended to Syrian, Jordanian, and additional assets, culminating in the destruction of nearly 450 Arab planes with minimal losses of 19 . The success underscored that concentrated air power, applied at the outset of against fixed , can cripple enemy offensive potential before ground engagements intensify. Critical enablers included meticulous intelligence gathering and operational deception, which allowed IAF planners to map airfield layouts, radar positions, and daily routines with precision. Strikes commenced at 07:45 local time, exploiting a known Egyptian breakfast period when most pilots were absent from cockpits and aircraft were fueled but unguarded. Low-altitude approaches below radar detection thresholds, combined with runway cratering munitions to impede rapid repairs, minimized enemy response time. Superior pilot training and adherence to principles of war—such as surprise, economy of force, and offensive initiative—facilitated multiple sorties per aircraft, with IAF planes averaging up to four missions daily despite logistical constraints. These elements highlight causal linkages between preparation and outcome, where Arab forces' numerical superiority in aircraft (Egypt alone fielded over 400) proved irrelevant due to complacency and poor dispersal practices. For contemporary air forces, Operation Focus remains a for prioritizing first-strike capabilities against peer or near-peer threats, emphasizing investments in real-time intelligence, , and resilient basing to counter modern integrated air defenses. While advanced surface-to-air missiles and technologies have evolved threats since 1967, the operation's validation of preemption in existential scenarios persists, as evidenced by its emulation in doctrines advocating (SEAD) prior to deeper strikes. It cautions against overreliance on quantitative metrics, instead favoring qualitative edges in training, adaptability, and bold execution, principles reinforced in post-war analyses of IAF performance. In an era of contested , the lesson endures that air superiority is not merely supportive but often determinative, requiring forces to maintain high readiness for opportunistic, high-risk operations to avert in prolonged conflicts.

Recent Historiographical Insights

Recent scholarship on Operation Focus has leveraged declassified Israeli operational logs, Arabic military memoirs, and archives to offer more precise reconstructions of the airstrikes' execution. Shlomo Aloni's 2019 study emphasizes the Israeli Air Force's (IAF) phased-wave tactics, launched at 07:45 on June 5, 1967, which targeted 18 Egyptian airfields simultaneously, exploiting low-altitude ingress to bypass radar detection and destroy over 280 Egyptian aircraft—primarily MiG-21s and Su-7s—parked in clustered formations due to inadequate dispersal protocols. This analysis highlights how IAF pilots, trained on French IIIs and Mystères, achieved a 90% sortie success rate in the opening hours, with refueling techniques enabling rapid turnaround despite numerical inferiority ( fielded 183 combat aircraft against Egypt's 420). Tom Cooper and Efim Sandler's 2024 volume further refines these accounts by integrating pre-war Arab inventories from Syrian and Jordanian records, revealing systemic vulnerabilities such as pilot absenteeism during morning hours and reliance on Soviet-supplied equipment plagued by maintenance issues. The authors document how subsequent strikes extended to Syrian (destroying 53 ) and Jordanian (29 ) bases by midday, totaling 452 Arab losses against 19 , attributing causal primacy to on airfield layouts over Arab overconfidence following Nasser's . These works counter earlier inflated Arab claims of minimal damage, corroborated by wreck counts and CIA post-strike assessments estimating 75-80% of rendered inoperable in the first day. Such insights underscore the operation's reliance on empirical factors like timing and surprise rather than technological superiority alone, with recent sources admitting delayed scrambles due to false assurances of defensive pacts. This shifts focus from mythic invincibility to verifiable causal chains: Arab forces' failure to disperse assets post-April 1967 Syrian clashes enabled the IAF's strike, fundamentally altering the war's trajectory within 12 hours.

References

  1. [1]
    Operation Moked (1967) | IDF
    At 11:30 AM, following a Syrian air attack, the commander of the Israel Air Force decided to redirect planes to Syria and destroy Syrian airports. In parallel, ...Missing: details | Show results with:details
  2. [2]
    Israel's 'Operation Focus': Inside One of the Most Successful Air ...
    Jun 6, 2022 · Nearly all of Israel's 196 combat planes were committed to the air strike. Only 12 were left behind to defend the State of Israel. The planes ...
  3. [3]
    [PDF] Israeli Air Superiority in the 1967 Arab-Israeli War - DTIC
    Jun 14, 1996 · This paper analyzes the Israeli Air Force (IAF) practice of operational art in the planning and execution of the preemptive air strike against ...
  4. [4]
    Arab-Israeli War of 1967 - state.gov
    On April 7, 1967 a skirmish on land turned into a major air battle during which Israel shot down six Syrian MiG aircraft over Mount Hermon on the Golan Heights.
  5. [5]
    1967 war: Six days that changed the Middle East - BBC News
    Jun 5, 2017 · Fifty years ago, war broke out between Israel and its neighbours. The conflict lasted just six days but its effect would last to the present day.
  6. [6]
    Immediate Drift | The Six-Day War
    In the spring of 1967, tensions between Syria and Israel ran high, with flashpoints including terrorist raids against Israel originating from Syria.
  7. [7]
    The 1967 Arab-Israeli War - Office of the Historian
    By the spring of 1967, the Israelis were retaliating forcefully against Syria, whose leaders demanded that Egypt intervene on their behalf. The Prewar Crisis.
  8. [8]
    Press Release - Historical Documents - Office of the Historian
    Gathering tension between Israel and Egypt reached crisis proportions on May 22, when Nasser announced the closure to Israeli ships of the Gulf of Aqaba, an ...
  9. [9]
    Nasser Closes Straits of Tiran, Pushing Toward Six-Day War | CIE
    Nasser closed the Straits of Tiran, moved troops to Sinai, and banned UNEF troops, which Israel saw as aggression, leading to the Six-Day War.
  10. [10]
    Arab Threats Against Israel | The Six-Day War
    Arab Threats Against Israel ... In the weeks leading up to the Six Day War, Arab leaders repeatedly threatened Israel with annihilation. Together with Egypt's ...
  11. [11]
    Six-Day War | Definition, Causes, History, Summary, Outcomes ...
    Sep 4, 2025 · In October 1956 Israel invaded Egypt's Sinai Peninsula. In five days the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) captured Gaza, Rafah, and Al-ʿArīsh ...Arab-Israeli wars · Yom Kippur War · Camp David Accords
  12. [12]
    Israel's Road to the June 1967 War | CIE
    Cairo announces the mobilization of reserves, adding more than 100,000 men to Egypt's armed forces, estimated at 200,000. May 22: Egyptian President Gamal Abdul ...
  13. [13]
    Six-Day War: Statement to the Knesset by Prime Minister Eshkol
    By 20 May 1967 it was estimated that some 60,000 Egyptian troops had crossed into Sinai. Their numbers had grown to 85,000 two days later. On 21 May, Egypt ...
  14. [14]
    [PDF] Six Days in 1967, Operational Art in the Sinai. - DTIC
    Two Egyptian divisions move to the Israeli border in the Sinai. 19 May 1967: Israel fully mobilizes reserves. 29 May 1967: Egypt increases force to seven ...
  15. [15]
    Egypt Reimposes a Blockade on the Straits of Tiran (May 1967)
    On May 23, as he was flying to Cairo, he heard that Egypt had re-imposed the naval blockade on the Straits of Tiran (see Section XI). President Nasser announced ...
  16. [16]
    Text of Nasser's Speech on the Blockade of Aqaba
    The Jews threatened war. We tell them: You are wel- come, we are ready for war. Our armed forces and all our people are ready for war, but under ...<|separator|>
  17. [17]
    Intelligence During the Six-Day War (1967) - Jewish Virtual Library
    The Israeli Air Force destroyed 304 out of 419 Egyptian aircraft on the ground, 53 out of 112 Syrian planes, and Jordan's entire 28-plane Air Force. The IAF ...
  18. [18]
    [PDF] The Six Day War: The Intelligence Assessments on the Road to War
    According to the assessment, every day that passed reduced Israel's chances of achieving air superiority in the war.
  19. [19]
    The Israeli Air Force & Operation Moked - The Military Historian
    Sep 7, 2015 · Operation Moked remains one of the most successful air strikes in military history, perhaps only exceeded in scale and magnitude by the ...
  20. [20]
    6 days that changed Israel forever: The Middle East at war (Part 2)
    May 13, 2024 · They called the plan Mivtza Moked. In English, Operation Focus. Mivtza Moked may have been a surprise, but the plan was years in the making.Missing: formulation | Show results with:formulation<|control11|><|separator|>
  21. [21]
    The Six Day War - by Adam Hummel - Catch
    Jun 5, 2024 · The planning for this operation began in 1962, by Maj. Gen. Ezer Weizman, commander of the IAF, and later Israel's seventh President. That ...<|separator|>
  22. [22]
    Operation Moked: How Israel Dominated the Air during the Six Day War
    ### Summary of Operation Moked Development, Formulation, and Planning
  23. [23]
    [PDF] The 1967 Arab-Israeli War: An Operational Study of the Sinai ... - DTIC
    When intelligence again assessed that an attack was not imminent, the decision was made not to react - above the objections of the new Israeli Chief of Staff, ...
  24. [24]
    Israel Air Force In the Six-Day War - Jewish Virtual Library
    By day's end, IAF Commander Mordechai (Motti) Hod proudly announced that the Arab air forces had been destroyed. From this point on, the IAF turned its ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  25. [25]
    The Sinai Air Strike: June 5, 1967 - Warfare History Network
    The Sinai Air Strike: June 5, 1967. The Sinai Air Strike began with a routine flight—so routine that Egyptian radarmen barely took notice. This article appears ...Missing: details | Show results with:details
  26. [26]
    [PDF] THE STRATEGIC DEVELOPMENT OF THE ISRAELI AIR FORCE BY ...
    IAF operational inventory on the eve of Operation Moked, 1 June 1967. Aircraft. Aircraft Type. Number of Aircraft. Sud Vautour. Combat / Fighter. 25. Dassault ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  27. [27]
    [PDF] Deception, Surprise and Attack: Operational Art for Air Superiority
    May 16, 2006 · 38. With tensions high on both sides, Israeli deception was required to assure surprise, gain the initiative, and allow Moked to succeed.
  28. [28]
    The Egyptian Front | The Six-Day War
    In the course of the fighting more than 5000 Egyptian soldiers were captured, including 500 officers, who were taken as prisoners to trade for the few Israeli ...
  29. [29]
    [PDF] CIA COMMENTS ON THE ISRAELI AIR CAMPAIGN: 5-10 JUNE 1967
    The sole focus of the initial attack was the neutralization of Arab air forces by destroying either their aircraft or their runways. Later, after air ...Missing: declassified | Show results with:declassified
  30. [30]
    Six-Day War 1967 : Operation Focus and the 12 hours that changed ...
    Operation Focus was Israel's ingenious strike plan to overturn the balance. At 0745hrs on June 6, Israeli jets hit Egypt's airfields simultaneously, first ...Missing: declassified | Show results with:declassified<|control11|><|separator|>
  31. [31]
    [PDF] The Struggle for Air Superiority - Air University
    Mar 10, 2020 · The destruction of most of the aircraft of the Arab air forces while on the ground granted almost compete air superiority to Israel and ...
  32. [32]
    Former Egyptian MiG pilots provide an unprecedented perspective ...
    5, 1967, the “Operation Moked” (“Focus”), is meanwhile well known. This strike ranks amongst the most successful and celebrated military operations of all times ...Missing: rate | Show results with:rate
  33. [33]
    Israel's army forgets 1967 lessons | News - Al Jazeera
    Jul 22, 2007 · The bases were attacked in the morning, when Arab pilots were still breakfasting, and to keep up the momentum Israeli pilots often flew four or ...
  34. [34]
    [PDF] Analysis of the Six Day War, June 1967 - DTIC
    This chapter will review each of the principles of war listed in Air Force Manual (AFM) 1-1, and it will show how those principles were applied (or misapplied) ...
  35. [35]
    [PDF] The 1967 Arab-Israeli Six-Day War - DTIC
    Jun 7, 2025 · By noon on the first morning there were a total of nineteen airfields attacked in the Sinai, the Suez Canal Zone, the Cairo Area, the Nile ...
  36. [36]
    Operation Focus - BBC NEWS | In Depth
    The Israeli Air Force (IAF) loses 19 planes, about 10% of its strength, mostly due to mechanical failure or accidents. Five Israeli pilots are killed and five ...
  37. [37]
    The Six-Day War of 1967 | Proceedings - June 1968 Vol. 94/6/784
    Regarding the cost to Israel of inflicting this crippling blow, by Tuesday night (6 June), after more than 1,000 sorties, Israeli losses amounted to 26 aircraft ...
  38. [38]
    Operation Focus - Zionism & Israel
    Nov 22, 2008 · Operation Focus (Moked) - Commander Moti (Mordechai) Hod In order to make the plan possible, Israel would have to use every single available ...
  39. [39]
  40. [40]
    Not by the Air Force Alone: The IAF and the IDF during the Six Day ...
    A journalist referred to the Israel Air Force's (IAF) Operation Focus as destroying the Egyptian Air Force, “launching the Six Day War and deciding the fate of ...Missing: details | Show results with:details
  41. [41]
    [PDF] I 75 The Six Day War: The Victory that Spurred a Fixed Mindset - INSS
    launched a preemptive air attack (Operation Moked) against Egypt, Syria,. Jordan, and Iraq and achieved air superiority, which was a decisive factor in the ...Missing: impact | Show results with:impact
  42. [42]
    The Six-Day War: military and air analysis of the 1967 conflict
    Nov 29, 2024 · Israel's air attack, dubbed Operation Focus (Moked), was the decisive point of entry into the conflict. At dawn on June 5, the majority of the ...<|separator|>
  43. [43]
    [PDF] The Role of the Israel Air Force in the Operational Doctrine of the ...
    Israeli air superiority.11. There is also no doubt that, in a future war, whether initiated by the IDF or enemy forces, the IAF would gain air superiority ...
  44. [44]
    [PDF] The Effect of the Six Day War on Arab Security Concepts - INSS
    This essay seeks to examine the effects of the Arab defeat in the Six Day. War on the security concepts of the three main countries that took part in the war: ...
  45. [45]
    [PDF] The Six Day War -- How the Israeli Defense Forces Achieved ... - DTIC
    Apr 5, 2012 · The resulting destruction of Arab militaries and Israeli control of significant terrain provided Israel valuable strategic depth in the ...Missing: disunity | Show results with:disunity
  46. [46]
    [PDF] Nasser Closes the Straits of Tiran, Signs Defense Pact with Jordan
    During the night of May 22 and 23, between the opening of the debate on the Prime Minister's statement and its con- clusion, while U Thant was en route to ...<|separator|>
  47. [47]
    Statement by President Nasser to Arab Trade Unionists (May 1967)
    When Eshkol and Rabin threatened Syria, nobody spoke about peace or threats to peace. They actually hate the progressive regime in Syria. The United States, ...
  48. [48]
    The Six Day War—1967 | The Use of Force in International Law
    This contribution analyzes the 1967 hostilities that began when Israel attacked Egyptian forces in the Sinai Peninsula. It sets out the relations between Israel ...
  49. [49]
    The Lie That Won't Die: Collusion, 1967 - Middle East Forum
    In another example, opinion polls show that a vast majority of Arabs believe that the attacks of September 11, 2001, were the work of Israeli intelligence.
  50. [50]
    [PDF] Rethinking the Six Day War: An Analysis of Counterfactual ...
    Seizing the opportunity that presented itself in May 1967, Amer manipulated Nasser into escalating tensions with Israel to a point that would inevitably mean ...<|separator|>
  51. [51]
    [PDF] The June, 1967 War: Fifty Years On
    The events in question begin on June 5, 1967, when Israel launched the third Arab-Israeli war with simultaneous attacks on the territories of Jordan, Syria and ...
  52. [52]
    [PDF] nasser and his enemies: foreign policy decision making in egypt on ...
    In Nasser's public speeches and private conversations of 1967, Israel's intentions are consistently portrayed as hostile, threatening, deceitful, and aggressive ...
  53. [53]
    THE JUNE 1967 AND OCTOBER 1973 ARAB-ISRAELI WARS - CIA
    The June 1967 and October 1973 Arab-Israeli Wars: Egyptian military moves in Sinai, as well as Arab troop movements elsewhere were defensive and for political ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  54. [54]
    International Right to Self-Defense: The Six Day War
    As is generally known, Israel launched a preemptive war of self defense on opponents of vastly greater size, population, and military strength than her, in ...
  55. [55]
    West Bank's 1967 Israeli invasion: does self defence justify 50+ ...
    Oct 30, 2023 · In the context of the 'Six Day War', Israel argued that the actions of Egypt, prior to the war, were a justification enough to act in self- ...
  56. [56]
    Defending in Advance (Chapter 17) - The Six-Day War and Israeli ...
    In the future development of the law, the June 1967 war ... Nuclear Non-Proliferation and “Preventive Self-Defence”: Why Attacking Iran Would Be Illegal; Authors ...
  57. [57]
    In Hindsight: The Increasing Use of Article 51 of the UN Charter and ...
    Sep 30, 2025 · Article 51 of the UN Charter, which recognises member states' right of self-defence against an armed attack, sits at the heart of these debates.
  58. [58]
    The Secret Military Unit Behind Israel's Stunning Six Day War Victory
    May 6, 2013 · The air campaign lasted only three hours and resulted in the nearly complete destruction of the Arab warplanes, which were caught off guard at ...
  59. [59]
    Israeli Air Strikes, Six-Day War - Military History - WarHistory.org
    Dec 14, 2024 · Israeli Air Strikes, Six-Day War · Operation Focus: A Winning Air Strike · Years of Meticulous Planning · About the Performance: “Air France”.
  60. [60]
    Air Power in the Six-Day War - Taylor & Francis Online
    According to the legends that have grown up around the war, on 5 June 1967 the Israeli Air Force (IAF) obliterated the Arab air forces and thereby won the ...Missing: losses | Show results with:losses
  61. [61]
    How did Operation Focus impact the overall outcome of the Six-Day ...
    Jul 11, 2025 · On June 5th 1967, all of Israel's operational jets were launched in a massive attack against Egypt's airfields. Flying low to avoid radar ...What strategy did Israel use in the 1967 6-day War? - QuoraWhat actually caused the Six-Day War in 1967 between the Israelis ...More results from www.quora.comMissing: Aman | Show results with:Aman
  62. [62]
    (PDF) Air Power in the Six-Day War - ResearchGate
    On 5 June 1967 the Israeli Air Force (IAF) obliterated the Arab air forces and thereby won the Six-Day War before it really began.
  63. [63]
    [PDF] Operation Moked And The Principles Of War. - DTIC
    May 19, 1997 · The goal was to maintain a strong and intimidating system of defense that would deter or prevent any Arab military initiatives of any great ...
  64. [64]
    Israeli Air Superiority in the 1967 Arab-Israeli War - DTIC
    Israeli Air Superiority in the 1967 Arab-Israeli War: An Analysis of Operational Art. ... win the Six Day War. Read Less Read More. Author(s):. Jones, Ronald ...
  65. [65]
    The Israel Air Force in the 1967 and 1973 wars
    A meticulous descriptive account of the preparation and execution of Operation Focus can be found in Shlomo Aloni, The June 1967 Six-Day War (Volume A): ...<|separator|>