Because of the benefits with which the Golan Heights now provide Israel, there is great sympathy to the idea of never giving up the heights, as seen here. “ Public opinion in Israel appears not to favour withdrawal. Opponents say the heights are too strategically important to be returned. An opinion poll in January 2004 suggested that a majority of Israelis opposed plans to hand back the Golan to Syria. This attitude of keeping the land for themselves can be found at every step of the social ladder. As seen here, the municipalities are pushing for “settlement on the Syrian heights - a civilian presence, so that no one could just order a withdrawal. There'd have to be a debate in the Knesset.”
Syria's attitude towards Israel was one of complexity, especially when reflected by the former president of Syria, Asad, who “held an extremely negative view of Israel, seeing it not only as an imperial outpost but also as a territorially acquisitive neighbor bent on becoming the dominant power in the region.” This fear of a neighbor that Asad saw as expansionist was easily understandable due to the grand military advantage Israel now holds with the Golan Heights. “ Overlooking northern Israel and southern Syria, the heights give Israel an excellent vantage point for monitoring Syrian movements. The topography provides a natural buffer against any military thrust from Syria.” This feeling is understandable, and most Syrians must have somewhat shared it. A country which was created by a foreign nation has just taken land from its rightful inhabitants. Other problems facing Syria, without question, likely helped develop this attitude towards Israel even more.
“As Asad saw it, two major dilemmas were inherent in the postwar situation. The first was posed by America's peace initiatives which appeared designed to draw Nasser, now humbled by war, and an all too willing King Husayn into separate settlements with Israel - settlements which offered little to the Palestinians and nothing to Syria, leaving it exposed to Israeli power and unable to recover its lost territory on the Golan.”
With these difficulties it is not surprising why the attitude of the Syrians concerning Israel was harsh. Yet President Asad appeared to have another feeling about Israel, one which was less upset than the previous one. “He understood the Jewish state was there to stay; but there was still a battle to be fought over the terms on which it stayed.”
This is why earlier, it was stated that Syria's opinion of Israel is confusing, to say the least. Although the first view shared by Asad is most likely the one felt by the majority, the fact is that Asad realized some fundamental changes that were now out of his hands. It demonstrates that Syria to some degree learns from its mistakes, a valuable tool for further peace negotiations.
The attitudes about the Golan Heights were the same as would be seen in any other conflict. Israel believed it had rebuilt its rightful promised land, a good gain for its victory. Syria's loss of the war spurned it away, as it had lost a very important piece of Syrian property, and now faced the difficult task of reclaiming it.
Finally this paper will look at what each country did to reconcile peace after the war of 1967. It should be remembered that the attitudes expressed in the previous argument, undoubtedly had a profound effect on peace negotiations.
When it came to making a peace deal with Syria, Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eshkol was already plagued with issues, notably as to how much leverage the Golan Heights would provide. One newspaper ad remarked “No Soil of Liberated Territory of Our Land Will Be Returned.” Although these were more right-wing emotions being expressed, even in Eshkol's own party some were not entirely sure about returning the land for peace, “[t]hey had accepted the need for partition, yet the music of biblical names such as Hebron and Jericho aroused them as well.” The fact that Israel now controlled all of its promised land, as mentioned earlier, made it so that no matter how much of a pragmatic individual, it would be difficult to return all the land. On June 19 th Israel was prepared to give back the Golan Heights, in exchange for peace, but a survey team, which appeared to have no supervision by higher authority, caused the transfer to be canceled.
With the increased land occupancy in the Golan by Israeli settlers, made it difficult for Israeli Prime Ministers to even try to return the Golan to Syria in exchange of peace. This was because Syria wanted Israel to withdraw entirely out of the heights, passed the 1967 border. Asad believed also that any peace with Israel should be more than just a peace with Syria, it should instead be a peace with all the Middle East.
