The War of 1948–49: Founding and Flight
When the British withdrew and Israel declared independence on May 14, 1948, war erupted immediately. Five Arab states—Egypt, Transjordan (later Jordan), Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq—invaded. Local Palestinian militias also joined the fight. The Arab League’s stated goal: to prevent the establishment of a Jewish state in what they viewed as Arab land.
What followed was the first of many Arab–Israeli wars, known variously as the War of Independence (to Israelis), the Nakba (“catastrophe,” to Palestinians), or simply the 1948 War in Western histories.
Key Phases of the Conflict
December 1947–May 1948 – A civil war between Jewish and Palestinian Arab communities broke out after the UN partition vote, with mutual attacks on convoys, neighborhoods, and villages.
May–July 1948 – Arab forces invaded. Israel defended its core territory.
July–October 1948 – With arms from Czechoslovakia and an influx of immigrants and foreign volunteers, Israel counterattacked, gaining territory in the Galilee, Negev, and coastal plain.
1949 – Armistice agreements were signed with Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. These ended active fighting but did not establish peace.
By war’s end, Israel controlled 78% of the former British Mandate—more than the 55% allocated under the UN partition plan. The remaining 22%—the West Bank and Gaza Strip—did not become a Palestinian state. Instead, they were held by neighboring Arab powers.
Why Jordan and Egypt Kept the Land
Jordan: Annexation and Ambition
In 1950, Jordan formally annexed the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. The move was recognized only by Britain, Iraq, and Pakistan; the United States granted de facto recognition but avoided formal endorsement.
Why?
Strategic expansion – The West Bank offered arable land and historic prestige.
Dynastic ambition – King Abdullah I aspired to unite Arab lands under Hashemite rule.
Control over Palestinian nationalism – The monarchy saw Palestinian national identity as a threat to Hashemite legitimacy and sought to absorb the population without enabling political autonomy.
Egypt: Military Occupation Without Annexation
Egypt occupied the Gaza Strip, but did not annex it or grant residents citizenship.
Why?
Symbolic leadership – Control of Gaza allowed Egypt to claim leadership in the Arab struggle without long-term commitment.
Avoidance of burden – Egypt kept Gaza under military administration with little civil investment.
Pan-Arabist strategy – Keeping the Palestinian issue unresolved maintained Egypt’s influence in regional politics.
Though Arab states spoke of Palestinian liberation, none moved to establish a Palestinian state in the West Bank or Gaza. Palestinians remained stateless—excluded both by Israel and by their presumed allies.
Secret Zionist–Jordanian Dealings
Much of the war’s outcome was shaped not only by violence, but by quiet diplomacy.
In late 1947 and again in May 1948, Golda Meir met secretly with King Abdullah I in Amman. The Jewish Agency proposed a tacit understanding: Jordan would not attack the Jewish state, and in return, Israel would not oppose Jordan’s control of the Arab areas of Palestine.
Abdullah agreed in principle. He sought to expand his kingdom and marginalize his rival, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who led the Palestinian nationalist movement. Though pressured into joining the war by other Arab states, Jordan’s Arab Legion avoided advancing into core Jewish-held areas, focusing instead on Jerusalem and the West Bank, which it would later annex.
This informal arrangement was never formalized but helped shape the postwar map. Once again, Palestinian political aspirations were excluded from the deal-making.
The Palestinian Refugee Crisis
One of the most enduring legacies of the war was the displacement of an estimated 700,000 to 750,000 Palestinian Arabs from their homes in what became Israel.
Causes of Flight: Complex and Disputed
Combat and chaos – Many fled active battle zones.
Expulsions – In towns like Lydda and Ramle, Israeli forces removed Arab populations following military operations.
Fear and atrocity rumors – The Deir Yassin massacre (April 1948), where over 100 villagers were killed by Zionist militias, created panic. (Casualty estimates and details remain debated among historians.)
The causes varied by region. Some departures were forced; others were preemptive, driven by fear or miscalculation. Scholars like Benny Morris emphasize that no single explanation fits all cases.
After the war, Israel denied most refugees the right to return, citing security, demographic risks, and national capacity. Arab states refused to integrate them, and most remained in camps—dispossessed and politically frozen.
At the same time, roughly 800,000 Jews fled or were expelled from Arab countries, many resettling in Israel. Though different in origin and outcome, both population displacements hardened national identities and grievances on each side.
The Human Cost: 1% of Israel’s Population Killed
The refugee crisis was only one dimension of the war’s cost. The human toll was devastating on all sides:
Around 6,000–6,400 Jews/Israelis were killed, about 1% of the Jewish population at the time.
By comparison, the U.S. lost approximately 0.1% of its population in World War II.
Arab casualties are estimated at 13,000–15,000, including Palestinians and Arab soldiers. While Israel internalized the war as a fight for survival, Palestinians experienced it as national erasure. These divergent memories still shape competing political realities.
Why Didn’t Israel Give the Land Back?
After the war, Israel retained the land it had captured beyond the 1947 UN partition plan. This decision was shaped by security, ideology, and political circumstance.
1. Security
The original UN borders were viewed as strategically indefensible.
With no peace treaty and hostile neighbors, Israel saw land retention as a defensive necessity.
2. Lack of a Negotiating Partner
Arab states refused to recognize Israel or negotiate directly.
There was no Palestinian leadership empowered to make peace, and Egypt and Jordan had their own territorial claims.
3. Demographic Concerns
Returning territory could mean accepting hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees, risking the Jewish majority in the new state.
4. Ideological Conviction
Many Zionists believed the land captured had biblical and historical significance and saw its recovery as justified.
5. Weak International Pressure
The UN’s Resolution 194 called for refugee return or compensation, but Arab states rejected it.
Western powers, caught in the Cold War, quickly deprioritized enforcement.
The U.S. offered only mild, short-term pressure that faded by the early 1950s.
6. International Law Context
Under the UN Charter, acquiring territory by force is generally impermissible.
Critics argue that Israel’s retention of land violated international norms and emboldened territorial conquest globally.
Palestinian and Arab Counterarguments
To many Palestinians and Arabs, Israel’s refusal to return land and allow refugee return:
Violated the UN partition plan, which they had rejected but which had international legitimacy.
Rewarded territorial conquest, undermining post-WWII legal norms.
Established precedent for ignoring Palestinian rights and sovereignty.
Reinforced fears that Israel’s long-term aim was to expand rather than coexist.
These critiques—whether legal, moral, or political—continue to frame regional hostility and international opposition to Israeli policy.
The Cycle Begins
The 1948 war launched a cycle of conflict that remains unresolved:
Palestinians mourned the Nakba—loss of home, land, and sovereignty.
Israelis remembered survival after near-annihilation.
Arab regimes blamed Israel, while often denying Palestinians real agency.
Refugees remained stateless, fueling despair and radicalization.
The map was redrawn, but the core questions remained:
Who has the right to this land?
Can two national movements share it?
And what becomes of the people left behind by war?