Maximum Realistic Territorial Gains for Israel in 1948-1949?

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,239
SoCal
Out of curiosity--what was the maximum realistic territorial gains which Israel could have gotten in its 1948-1949 war with several Arab states?
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,239
SoCal
For reference, the purple areas in the map for 1949 here are the areas outside of the Jewish state in the 1947 U.N. Partition Plan which Israel acquired in its 1948-1949 war with several Arab states:

 

WeisSaul

Ad Honorem
Mar 2012
2,836
New Amsterdam
Against the Egyptians, Israeli forces were days away from taking Gaza and el-Arish when the ceasefire was called for. I don't think they'd really push beyond there due to supply lines being tougher to maintain past that point.


The Israelis had captured Jenin in an effort to divert Arab forces away from the siege of Jerusalem and quickly abandoned the place when Arab reinforcements came. Maybe they could have managed to hold on to that.

The Israelis assaulted Latrun on five separate occasions but failed. Maybe they could have taken it.

Kfar Etzion was Jewish settled so maybe that could have been held on to.

Tulkarm and Qalqiya are right across the Green line so perhaps the Israelis could have taken those villages.

Holding on to a bit more of the Jordan Valley in the north (south of Beit She'an) seems possible.

The Syrians didn't fare too well against the Israelis in the north, eventually being forced into defensive positions. If the Israelis had won the Battles of the Kinarot Valley rather than just stalemated, I think they could have taken the Golan.

If the Israelis took much more in the West Bank the Jordanians would probably come at them in full force rather than in the half-measured way they did historically as the Hashemites and Zionists had an agreement that the Jordanians would get the West Bank and they wouldn't push on against the Israelis.

In summation, Jenin, Tulkarm, Qalqiya, Latrun, Golan, Gaza, Kfar Etzion, a bit more of the Jordan Valley in the north, maybe land south of Jezreel, and El-Arish.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,239
SoCal
@WeisSaul: Do you think that taking East Jerusalem in 1948-1949 would have been realistically possible for Israel?
 

starman

Ad Honorem
Jan 2014
4,115
Connecticut
Against the Egyptians, Israeli forces were days away from taking Gaza and el-Arish when the ceasefire was called for. I don't think they'd really push beyond there due to supply lines being tougher to maintain past that point.
If memory serves, fear of British intervention, to protect the canal, prevented Israel from overrunning much of Sinai. Allon wrote afterwards that Israel could've taken much more had the war gone on.

The Israelis assaulted Latrun on five separate occasions but failed. Maybe they could have taken it.
From what I've read they could've taken it given a little more time. Boy if only the arabs had always had officers like those of the Legion...Jerusalem btw cost many casualties and may have been too tough.
 

WeisSaul

Ad Honorem
Mar 2012
2,836
New Amsterdam
@WeisSaul: Do you think that taking East Jerusalem in 1948-1949 would have been realistically possible for Israel?
Taking East Jerusalem would probably result in the full force of the Arab Legion coming down on the Israelis so I would say no.