Chris Krause on Nostr: The USS Liberty incident occurred on June 8, 1967, during the Six-Day War, when ...

The USS Liberty incident occurred on June 8, 1967, during the Six-Day War, when Israeli air and naval forces attacked the USS Liberty, a U.S. Navy technical research ship, in international waters off the Sinai Peninsula. The ship was not sunk—it survived the attack—but the incident resulted in the deaths of 34 American crew members and injuries to 171 others. Israel apologized for the attack, claiming it was a case of mistaken identity, asserting that they believed the Liberty was an Egyptian vessel. However, the reasons behind the attack remain a subject of debate and controversy, with no definitive consensus. Below are the main explanations that have been proposed, based on available evidence and perspectives.

Israel’s Official Explanation: Mistaken Identity

Israel has consistently maintained that the attack was an error. According to this narrative:
-During the war, Israeli forces were on high alert after reports of shelling on their positions near El Arish, which they initially attributed to an Egyptian naval vessel.
-The Liberty, despite being in international waters, was relatively close to the conflict zone (about 25.5 nautical miles northwest of Arish). Israeli reconnaissance misidentified it as the Egyptian supply ship El Quseir, a vessel of similar size but far less sophisticated.
-Communication breakdowns within the Israeli military, including a shift change that erased the Liberty’s earlier designation as a neutral ship, compounded the error. Israeli pilots and torpedo boat crews reported not seeing an American flag clearly due to smoke, distance, or angle, and a miscalculation of the ship’s speed (incorrectly estimated at 30 knots, suggesting a warship) led to the decision to attack.
-After the initial air assault, Israeli torpedo boats launched a second wave, further damaging the ship. Israel halted the attack once the ship’s American identity was confirmed, about an hour after it began, and offered assistance (which the U.S. declined).

This explanation is supported by official inquiries from both the U.S. and Israel. The U.S. Navy Court of Inquiry (1967) concluded it was a tragic mistake, citing miscommunications on both sides—such as the U.S. failure to promptly relay updated orders to the Liberty to stay farther from the coast—and Israeli errors in identification. Israel paid $13 million in compensation to the U.S. government and affected families, reinforcing their stance that it was unintentional.

Alternative Theories: Deliberate Attack

Many survivors, some U.S. officials, and independent researchers argue that the attack was intentional, citing inconsistencies in Israel’s account and suggesting strategic motives. These theories include:

1. Covering Up War Plans: One prominent hypothesis is that Israel attacked the Liberty to prevent the U.S. from discovering its impending plans to seize the Golan Heights from Syria, which occurred the following day (June 9). The Liberty, equipped with advanced surveillance gear, was intercepting communications that could have revealed Israel’s intentions, potentially complicating its ceasefire agreements or U.S. neutrality. Critics of Israel’s explanation point to the prolonged nature of the attack—over an hour, with strafing runs and torpedoes—as evidence of intent to sink the ship and eliminate witnesses.

2. False Flag Operation: Another theory posits that Israel aimed to sink the Liberty and frame Egypt, hoping to provoke the U.S. into entering the war against Egypt and its Soviet-backed allies. This aligns with Cold War tensions, where such a move could shift the regional balance. Survivors note the intensity of the attack, including machine-gunning of lifeboats (a potential war crime), as inconsistent with a simple error.

3. Protecting Intelligence Secrets: Some speculate that Israel feared the Liberty had intercepted sensitive information, such as alleged massacres of Egyptian POWs in Sinai (claims that remain disputed) or details of its nuclear program at Dimona, which the U.S. was monitoring covertly. Sinking the ship could have ensured silence.

Evidence cited for a deliberate attack includes:

-Survivor testimonies claiming Israeli planes buzzed the ship hours earlier, suggesting they knew its identity (contradicting Israeli claims of ignorance).
-Intercepted Israeli pilot communications, later referenced by some sources, where pilots reportedly hesitated or questioned the target’s identity, only to be ordered to proceed.
-The CIA’s initial June 13, 1967, report (later declassified) hinted at doubts about Israel’s story, though it stopped short of calling it deliberate.
-Statements from U.S. officials like Dean Rusk (Secretary of State) and Richard Helms (CIA Director), who privately expressed skepticism about the “mistake” narrative.

Critical Analysis

The mistaken identity explanation has gaps—such as why a well-marked U.S. ship was not recognized despite earlier flyovers, or why the attack persisted after initial strikes—but it aligns with the chaos of war and documented communication failures. The U.S. had not clearly informed Israel of the Liberty’s exact position, and orders to move the ship farther out (to 100 nautical miles) never reached it due to bureaucratic delays.

Conversely, deliberate attack theories struggle with motive and execution. If Israel intended to sink the Liberty, why did it fail despite a sophisticated military, with four of five torpedoes missing? Why would Israel risk alienating its key ally, the U.S., when it was already winning the war decisively? The lack of definitive proof—like an Israeli order explicitly targeting a known U.S. ship—keeps these theories speculative, though emotionally resonant for survivors who felt abandoned (e.g., U.S. jets were recalled mid-flight by Defense Secretary McNamara, a decision still unexplained).

Conclusion

Israel did not sink the USS Liberty—it survived, heavily damaged—and the attack’s true intent remains unresolved. The official narrative of a tragic error is plausible given wartime confusion, supported by multiple investigations, yet doubts persist due to the attack’s ferocity and inconsistencies in Israel’s account. Alternative theories of a deliberate strike suggest strategic motives but lack conclusive evidence. The incident reflects a mix of human error, poor coordination, and the fog of war, amplified by lingering mistrust and geopolitical stakes. As of March 9, 2025, no new declassified evidence has settled the debate, leaving it a polarizing chapter in U.S.-Israel relations.