Which of Israel's wars did it start?¶

Short answer: it comes down to one difference most "who started it" arguments miss — who committed the first act of war versus who fired the first big shot. For several wars, those are two different sides. Go by the first act of war (the casus belli — an invasion, a blockade, a cross-border raid), and Israel's adversaries opened essentially every major war: the 1948 invasion, the 1973 surprise attack, and the blockades, raids, and rocket fire that came before the rest. Israel's famous "first strikes" — 1956 and 1967 — were responses to blockades and armed raids that were already acts of war under international law. Go by who first used large-scale force, and Israel struck first in a few cases (1956, 1967 preemptively, several Gaza operations). Neither "serial aggressor" nor "spotless defender" survives the record — but Israel is far closer to the second, with two honest qualifiers: 1956's collusion and 1982's scope.

One note on scope first. "Who started it" is a different question from "was the conduct lawful" or "who is right about the deeper dispute." One side can open a war and the other side can still do wrong in how it fights — 1948's Arab invasion does not make every act in that war (Deir Yassin, the expulsions) justified, and 1967's casus belli does not settle the occupation that followed. This page answers only one thing: who opened each war.

The distinction that decides it¶

International law is clear that certain acts are themselves acts of war, whoever fires the first bullet [VERIFIED]:

A naval blockade — or closing an international strait to a state's shipping — is an act of war in customary law and is expressly listed as an act of aggression in the UN's definition (General Assembly Resolution 3314, Art. 3(c)) [VERIFIED].
Cross-border armed raids by a state's forces or state-sponsored irregulars are armed aggression [VERIFIED via UN Charter Art. 2(4)].

So if a state is already under a blockade or cross-border attack and then strikes, it is responding to a war already begun — not starting one. That is the lens below.

Wars opened by an act of war committed by Israel's adversaries¶

Conflict	Who opened it — the first act of war
1948 War of Independence	The Arab states invaded (Egypt, Transjordan, Syria, Iraq; Lebanon marginally) on 15 May 1948, the day after Israel's declaration — following the Arab rejection of the UN Partition Plan and the preceding intercommunal war [VERIFIED].
War of Attrition (1969–70)	Egypt (Nasser) launched sustained artillery war across the Suez Canal (formalized 8 March 1969) [VERIFIED].
Yom Kippur War (1973)	Egypt and Syria launched a coordinated surprise attack on the holiest day of the Jewish year, 6 October 1973 [VERIFIED — unambiguous].
1978 (Operation Litani)	The PLO's Coastal Road massacre (11 March 1978, ~38 Israeli civilians killed including 13 children) preceded Israel's cross-border operation days later [VERIFIED].
2006 Lebanon War	Hezbollah crossed the border on 12 July 2006, killing and capturing Israeli soldiers, with covering rocket fire [VERIFIED].
2021 (Guardian of the Walls)	Hamas fired the first rockets at Jerusalem after an ultimatum, 10 May 2021 [VERIFIED].
Gaza war (2023– )	Hamas launched the October 7, 2023 massacre [VERIFIED — unambiguous].

The "Israel struck first" wars — reclassified¶

These are the cases where Israel used large-scale force first. Here the act-of-war test moves the starting point to the other side:

1967 Six-Day War. Israel fired the first shot: the preemptive airstrike on 5 June 1967. But Egypt had already committed acts of war. It expelled UN peacekeepers, massed its army in Sinai, and on 22 May closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping. Nasser then declared, on 26 May, that "our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel" [VERIFIED / DOCUMENTED]. Closing the strait was a casus belli. Israel's strike answered a war already begun. (Two honest caveats. First, the Gulf of Aqaba's status as "international water" was itself legally contested — Egypt claimed it as territorial waters [DISPUTED]. Second, historians still debate whether Nasser truly wanted war or had drifted into a bluff he could not exit. Neither point changes that the blockade and mobilization were acts of war. Jordan then attacked despite an explicit Israeli warning, relayed that morning, to stay out [VERIFIED].)
1956 Suez/Sinai War — casus belli and collusion, both true. Egypt had blockaded the Straits of Tiran for years. From 1955 it also sponsored fedayeen raids from Gaza that killed Israeli civilians. These were real acts of war, and Israel's stated aim was to reopen the strait [VERIFIED]. But Israel's attack (29 October 1956) was also pre-arranged in secret collusion with Britain and France (the Protocol of Sèvres). The plan: Israel would invade, the two powers would "intervene to separate the combatants," seize the Suez Canal (which Nasser had nationalized), and try to topple him [VERIFIED]. So 1956 is the one case where a genuine casus belli was wrapped inside an opportunistic imperial venture. Both halves belong, and neither should be softened. (Fair nuance: the fedayeen cycle ran both ways — Israeli reprisal raids escalated it too.)
The Gaza operations (2008–09, 2012, 2014). Israel launched each named operation. But each came against a backdrop of Hamas rocket fire, itself an act of war. And the immediate trigger is contested case by case:
- Cast Lead (2008–09) is the one genuine "who broke the ceasefire" dispute. A six-month lull collapsed after a 4 November 2008 Israeli raid that killed Hamas fighters. Israel said it was destroying an offensive tunnel; Hamas said the tunnel was defensive. Hamas rocket barrages followed, and Israel attacked on 27 December. Each side blames the other — state both, adjudicate neither [DISPUTED].
- Pillar of Defense (2012): Israel struck the opening blow of the operation, the assassination of Hamas commander Ahmed Jabari, amid a two-way escalation [VERIFIED].
- Protective Edge (2014): Israel launched the operation after the June kidnap-murder of three Israeli teens, an arrest campaign, and escalating rockets [VERIFIED].

1982 — the clean "war of choice"¶

The 1982 Lebanon War is the sharpest case. It cuts against a reflexive defense of Israel, which is why one standard keeps it front and center. The trigger was real: the assassination attempt on Ambassador Shlomo Argov (3 June 1982). But it was carried out by the Abu Nidal group — a rival of the PLO Israel then attacked — and the US-brokered July 1981 border ceasefire had largely held for the preceding year [VERIFIED]. Meanwhile Defense Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to drive to Beirut and reshape Lebanon ("Big Pines") had been drawn up in December 1981, before the trigger [DOCUMENTED]. Prime Minister Begin himself called it, in August 1982, a "war of choice." So the trigger was an act of terrorism, but the war — its pre-planned drive to Beirut against a quiet border — was a choice. Trigger real; scope chosen.

The one-standard verdict¶

Two propaganda framings both fail:

"Israel is a serial aggressor who starts its wars" — collapses. Its adversaries opened the existential wars (1948, 1973) and the major non-state assaults (2006, 2023). Its two famous "first strikes" (1956, 1967) followed blockades and raids that were already acts of war.
"Israel is a spotless defender that never starts anything" — does not fully survive either. 1956 was entangled with an imperial collusion. 1982's scope was a war of choice. And Israel launched the named Gaza operations, amid contested triggers.

The precise, undismissable statement: by the test that actually governs — who committed the first act of war — Israel's adversaries opened essentially every major Arab–Israeli war, including the two Israel is most often accused of "starting" (1956 and 1967), where blockade and cross-border raids were the casus belli. The honest exceptions are narrow: 1956's collusion with an Anglo-French operation, and 1982's chosen scope. Not "always the aggressor," not "never the initiator" — and far closer to the second than the first.