On 8 June 1982, 2 days after Israel invaded Lebanon, Prime Minister Menachem Begin (1913–1992) defended the government decision to go to war during a nonconfidence vote in the Knesset and concluded his statement with the following words: Occasionally, our people have a meeting with history. Well, our soldiers are currently in Tyre. We remember the chapter in Ezekiel 27, verse 8: “Your wise men, O Tyre, were aboard; they were your pilots.” We stand today in Sidon. And we remember the verse in Isaiah, 23, verse 12: “No more of your reveling, Virgin Daughter Sidon, now crushed!” We also remember the two chapters in the Book of Kings recounting the friendship between Hiram, king of Tyre, and David, our king, and the alliance that our king Solomon made for the construction of the first temple with the king of Tyre. We cannot provide Tyre with what Solomon provided it, but we will give it security, peace, and serenity, as long as there is peace in Nahariya, which for years has been shelled by Katusha rockets from Tyre. No more. Everyone will have serenity. Us and them.1 But Begin was not the first to make the allusion to this biblical story. In fact, from the 1920s, the Hiram–Solomon alliance served as an important cultural and historical reference point for Jews (and Hebrews, more on this below) living British Mandatory Palestine. It offered a model of a modern alliance between the renewed Jewish (or Hebrew) national movement taking shape in Mandatory Palestine and the Lebanese national movement conceived and led mainly by Christians who sought to create a polity distinct from Arab and/or Syrian nationalism in the Land of the Cedars. Thus, Begin was using a cultural–political reference point that was familiar to many Israelis and that, as I will argue, played an important role in shaping Israel's policies towards Lebanon in 1982. In fact, supplementing Israel's cold political calculations, the concept of the alliance offered a cultural context and a romantic allure in its policies towards Lebanon. It presented a framework for Israelis who preferred to see Lebanon not for what it was—a complex society composed of multiple sectarian communities at war with each other—but as a Christian haven with ancient and friendly ties to Israel going back 3000 years to the time of this biblical alliance. This article contributes to two fields of study. First, studies on the Israeli invasion of Lebanon abound, but practically, all focus on the politics of the Arab–Israeli conflict, Israel/Palestine and the 1975–1990 Lebanese civil war (Schiff and Ya'ari 1984; Kipnis 2024; Anziska 2018; Fisk 1990; Menargues 2004). The article adds to this literature by shedding light on particular cultural perceptions, founded on biblical-turned-national myths, that informed Israeli policies and actions towards Lebanon in 1982. Second, the significance of the Hebrew Bible for Jewish nationalism is well known and has been studied extensively (Shavit and Eran 2007; Masalha 2013). Anthony Smith and others have also studied how ancient religious texts shaped modern national movements, Zionism included (Smith 2003). The Hebrew Bible provided the Zionist movement with not only a justification for the idea of Jewish return to the land (‘The Bible is our mandate’, famously said David Ben-Gurion in 1937) but also with cultural myths embedded in biblical stories that supported the consolidation of Jewish nationalism in the land. The Bible was (and arguably is even more so today) an ideological and political text for Zionists and for Hebrews and the case I explore here shows that it was also used in 1982 as a reference point for concrete political actions towards Lebanon, a country included in the spatial-biblical imagination of Israeli leaders and intellectuals. The article is divided into four sections. In the first section, I briefly discuss the use of the myth of the Hiram–Solomon alliance among Zionist Jews in mandatory Palestine and post-1948 Israel. In section two, I bring into our conversation the Young Hebrew or ‘Canaanite’ movement and its own use of the myth as it relates to Revisionist Zionism, the right-wing branch of the Zionist movement led by Menachem Begin from the 1940s until 1983. Section three discusses Aharon Amir, the Young Hebrew or Canaanite, and his ideas and actions with respect to Israeli–Lebanese relations. While I focus on a single individual, I also show that Amir was operating within broader circles of political and intellectual support in Israel. The final section focuses on the 1982 invasion and the efforts to frame an Israeli–Lebanese peace agreement as a renewal of the biblical Hiram–Solomon alliance. The myth of the Hiram–Solomon alliance (brit, in Hebrew, a word that will be often used in 1982) relied on the biblical story from the books of 2 Samuel and 1 Kings, in which we are told that King Hiram of Tyre sent King David cedar trees, carpenters, and masons to build his house in Jerusalem. When David's son, Solomon, decides to build the Temple, he makes a formal alliance with Hiram, who sends him cedars and cypresses from Lebanon by sea, and thousands of woodcutters and stonemasons are recruited from among Solomon's and Hiram's subjects. After 20 years of construction of the temple and the palace, Solomon gives Hiram 20 cities in the Galilee in return for his help in providing wood and gold. When Solomon builds a fleet of ships in Etzion Geber in the Red Sea, Hiram sends ships, and together with Solomon's ships, they bring gold from Ophir. It is a story (that has not been corroborated by historical or archeological evidence from the time period in which these biblical figures are assumed to be living), in a nutshell, of a political and commercial alliance between Hiram, king of Tyre and one of the strongest Phoenician kings at the time, and David and Solomon, kings of the Unified Kingdom, whose commercial strength depended on their cooperation with Tyre. The modern use of the myth of a renewed Hiram–Solomon alliance rested on at least two foundations. The first was the conviction that Jewish nationalism and Lebanese nationalism each drew their historical legitimacy from the ancient cultures and civilizations that had existed in their respective territories thousands of years earlier and of which they claimed to be modern heirs. The second was the belief that Jews in Mandatory Palestine and Christians in Lebanon are not only culturally similar and historically connected to each other but also possess shared political interests in combatting Arab nationalism that was then emerging and posing the strongest political and ideological force against each national movement. Journalist and public intellectual Itamar of and the Hebrew well this a to in Lebanon he an to the in his The to be we be we give to the of who Christian Lebanon to the of our renewed they are also a in the their The for now is that a country is to the of our which we make our to the country whose are not our our are not its but it is a connected to in two in its and in its renewed national The cooperation between Lebanon and the Hebrew national will Christian against Zionism and bring the on which we will be to to on the of for the Hebrews and the Lebanese the ancient of It is by that was to two the people of Lebanon and the people of in the days of David and Solomon, the kings of and the many the kings of Tyre and Sidon, so it is today the Lebanese and the Hebrews together to a renewed alliance in all its ancient the Lebanese of are the of they have the for thousands of years and the three of the ancient to Lebanon how and these in their country by the from to and The was the from to Sidon. which the and the the of the were by an ancient Hebrew the people of Hiram, King Solomon's the and we with Lebanon in the days were also of friendship and The of Lebanon now of the Sidon, and more. The to Israel was Tyre King David and his Solomon had friendly with Hiram king of Tyre and this after he And there is these between Israel and Lebanon, not be we the of that alliance in 1982, we make an important and bring into our the national and its with Revisionist Zionism, whose from the 1940s to the was and its of the biblical Hiram–Solomon alliance and its modern The Young in Mandatory Palestine as a distinct of Revisionist Zionism that sought to a Hebrew polity in the from Jewish rested on the belief that the national movement there was from the Jewish people in the (and from Jews of the its Hebrew and Hebrew and Hebrew they is a that has to with the renewed Hebrew in the they of which with the or Lebanon, and the and the the Hebrew in Palestine the all the living in this to the Hebrew by their Hebrew The of the by their (or and (or In its from the 1940s to the the movement had or even a many of were figures in the from literature to and (Shavit 1984; its the movement had a on Hebrew in Israel until and even after the leaders and many of its from Revisionist Zionism, the political movement that more Zionism the British and and Arab that the Young Hebrews that the be the on which the Hebrew is they also Revisionist Zionist the political of of the which they as the first towards their more The ‘Canaanite’ movement particular Lebanon and its with the emerging Hebrew in Mandatory Palestine. the as ancient Hebrews and the and cultural of into the Sea, the Hebrew he to with cultural of and he was with the own of the which these ancient as the of modern Lebanon an of the Hebrew that to and the modern of Israel and Lebanon as the culturally and of a role in and his Hebrew of the ancient Hebrews and had similar and also shared by many Revisionist Zionist But of from Jews and as the Young Hebrew movement Revisionist Zionists to Jewish a Revisionist and political in that of Tyre and Sidon, the in and they were Hebrews, and only and the of from the of and (Shavit was first and a Zionist in Jewish and not the of Lebanon by the Jewish in an Hebrews as and that in his who or and founded the more for the of The not only to the Israeli known today as the Jewish It first and the two important and the Israeli branch and the these two Hebrew are in and also important point in Hebrew was the between King Solomon of Israel and King Hiram of Tyre. The of this was to the two Hebrew for the of a in Revisionist of and to from within Revisionist Zionism and its political for the of the and Jewish the of the Jewish and the of Israel as a Hebrew in alliance with in the with Christians and in Lebanon. Menachem who of in not to these that important of his own the Hebrew of and Revisionist Jewish and to Jews were to his national and political The between Jewish and Young Hebrew national within in until the and was with the consolidation of of his political following the to in all that was of the Lebanon within his own movement was his belief that the biblical alliance between Hiram and Solomon and be in our Aharon Amir a Hebrew public and political in our story the of the Hiram–Solomon alliance in 1982. Amir was one of the first of the Young Hebrew movement and a of But had to with Zionism his Amir to his Hebrew also with the of Israel as a Jewish and with the Israeli and political a within circles and was by the Zionist multiple the Israel for in In an he in for the of the the intellectual of Revisionist Zionism, he was a he on his on his with the of and on his to Lebanon. The of Israel was for him but of the Hebrew movement in he following a in Lebanon he had for 2 in a that for the British in It was in that that he for the first time Lebanese from multiple and he the conviction of not only the for a political alliance with Lebanon but more of cultural with that also drew him to Lebanon, in the that he his Hiram and his second a Lebanese who to Israel in Amir in this article that the of the renewal of the Hebrew is with its to a Arab and that will the to the Arab Lebanon, for a for Israel of its historical and and and is towards to the and Christian its own it to on a is cultural and intellectual it from a long of as well as commercial its society is composed of it is a of and it as a and ideological for as well as an of and This is to Amir, he the of the between Lebanon and Israel and also Israel's in Lebanese after the When Amir this article in Israel's in Lebanon was in a it in historical context we a back and return to the which the of as Amir and as the for the of their national and Amir for the of the the of Israeli to their and Syrian and the of a Hebrew and the Hebrew so that they their Hebrew and the modern and Hebrew In Amir with Zionists of all political by for the and Amir, the were a first towards Israel's the of with that were to Lebanon in their Amir Amir, a of Israelis to and the of the and the it the to a of the that the and a as an to an Arab The a of interests and actions between Revisionist Zionism and Young Hebrew The Israeli of the as the of the Jewish of the it as an towards the of the Hebrew in the of the of the Lebanese civil war in Amir from in the political to between Lebanese and with an towards the of his Hebrew In he the Israel for Lebanon, and led by a from other public figures were also in the the and public intellectual Amir the force and public of its The with Christian Lebanese during the civil war and in Israel and Amir sought and government but of the from his own efforts among and in Israel and in which led to Israel's of Lebanon, Amir using the there as to the with Lebanon Amir he now has a to the Christian and in Lebanon and a and that will be political the two When was as of after the Amir sent him a on of the him on his and that the the of an Israel and Lebanon alliance of which the will important In these Amir what was a the government by Menachem Begin in that Israel has a to Christians in Lebanon. In fact, Begin this point and it, among other to the alliance between Israel and Lebanese 2024; In with years of in the Israel for Lebanon his Amir an a a a he his with more Revisionist Zionist towards Lebanon. In his Amir that the Land of Lebanon and the Land of Israel have a shared they are Land of in its and cultural he the Land of Israel and the Land of Lebanon to the and to the are of a historical and that has had multiple history. Amir and this be is a between Lebanon and more between other of there is an alliance between Israel and Lebanon that is by a for from the of the that years Amir that Lebanon and Israel have a to which for him was with In in the he that of is to and Israel is one peace for Israel and will not be peace for one peace for the his the the on Christians in Lebanon and their political the of Lebanon as a Christian country in of Israeli in Israel for was that Lebanon be the second Arab country to a peace agreement with the Jewish it the belief that of the to an agreement with but has to for a Arab country to so it with its to the In a statement to the Knesset on a a after Israel its peace agreement with Menachem Begin this on to with him in or a and a peace Israel has in Lebanon, Begin and the an agreement be in a of the also that a in Lebanon to be of on Israel from Lebanon which in the from the and in Lebanon be in Arab Thus, years the June 1982 Begin had his for the from Lebanon, the of the the of in other Arab and a peace agreement with the Lebanese In his second government was Begin and the of in public Israel's in Lebanon, the to a friendly government in that a peace agreement with Israel. This one of the in its war of June 1982. The for a peace not as Israel's was on but was to with Israel on this On a days the was by a Syrian his and to with and following an agreement was on but was We will return to this agreement but for now go back to Aharon Amir and June 1982. The invasion of Lebanon was a for Amir as he had been it for the of the Israel for Lebanon, Amir in to ties with Lebanese who shared his his he with Christian as and and as well as as The with as the a at the Lebanese had on modern Lebanon as Amir in and they by his and him at their in The Israeli which their to also sent on a to the and to the of Israel's invasion of their country In a to Menachem the for his to Lebanon, with his to to a peace and on the that the modern of Hiram and David and Solomon are to a alliance that will and the While in Amir, a in public of their in the In multiple the two claimed that Lebanon is not an Arab country and that the Israeli invasion for the of the biblical Hiram–Solomon alliance. In these to as the modern of the it be was in Phoenician circles in Lebanon as an of a of an and a had cultural and political by Amir, and a others at his was to him in for all Israel had for country and him of the of When the which the and the of from his as of to Israel to to The on and of the In a a of to the between and one of the Revisionist Zionist his own not only the but also to Lebanese Phoenician and to the that from and on the of to the in he the of a by in the Revisionist In this the of Lebanon with the and with the in the country and its and on the then that the Israeli is from that will now the and the from Lebanon, he Israel will not only Lebanon but also a to the The of the following to a Lebanese Christian from a of the sent this article from his Aharon Amir, known to from his to the between Lebanon and Israel. The is the of the Lebanese known and in our country in Israeli in his he is of or it to his belief in a between Lebanon and in his belief in the between Lebanon and Israel. we remember that the article was in the from and the that the of one of the important intellectual figures in Lebanon, a distinct Lebanese founded on the Christian and in the was the of the of and the and of Lebanese among other he that Lebanon was Lebanese Arab other with a and that an to the and has the years of In the at the of his his of Lebanese into the national of the his own on with and used this to and in for was a Lebanese was not an but a and distinct in and from It he of not a or important of the to was their use of his in and to Aharon the with Amir a in 1982. In public Israel's invasion of Lebanon as a to Lebanon from the which in the After Amir a to house in he for to to and a at the Hebrew the in and it to Amir, who it into Hebrew at Menachem Amir was to have Begin and during the which was to after Amir to Begin that to it we will be to the within after the of the of the of was on the and on and Israeli in Lebanon a made it to and all that from this is a of his and a the is a long and to Israel as a of Lebanon and to its leaders and soldiers who their to Lebanon from the and Arab It is with to Phoenician myth of and with to the of a biblical alliance between Hiram and Solomon as the was that we of years have the of our two were but it of this that there was between in our the one who not even the of land of from Tyre, among the in even the from your two And this is the alliance in that was between Hiram and Solomon, between a and a they and together their the who the has all the for The the And we to a peace It is We give so to the we bring this back to And who was not for the Lebanon and Israel together as so as to the in one in this of there be a of a And what be its Lebanon, which is in the by a of alliance with will bring Israel back to a And this Lebanon, which so to its will the Israel of the and Israel of the Amir his of which with a from providing his own of how he and had him a in Amir that Arab for Israeli for and sent him his and of his with a Amir from his in the to the to the Canaanite, of Lebanon. In a Amir how his with was his to Lebanon, in June 1982, he and other of the of the who as their ideological Amir the Israeli in Lebanon a and an alliance between the two in the days of Solomon and be for the to Amir, the of had he was in the of his Amir this section of the with these words: The and and were in the the of a a of with and a and his is following and the at and the house of Israel had in Lebanon it the of the biblical alliance between the modern the king Solomon and King Hiram also to even after the 1982 Amir to to Lebanon to his that he in his which from to Lebanese to Israel to an with a focus on and Phoenician or a to government the of his Amir with the and there is evidence of with When Israel and Lebanon their agreement on Amir sent a of to David of the of and the Israeli and is Amir of the agreement was the I have for on this The was as as be from the renewed Hiram–Solomon alliance to which Menachem Begin and Amir from the Lebanese to frame it as a peace agreement and of there was it be in the first that Israel's on to from government was to it, and Israel on a in Lebanon by its the Lebanon for Israel and Lebanon in their for the of and a of the Israeli to the at the the and the that in the of the Hiram–Solomon alliance be The belief in the of the agreement had as in the there was a that with the the of the and renewed in the years the for Galilee are in a of and in shared I remember during the one of the Lebanese who with in the Phoenician in his country and in an ideological between this and the Hebrew Lebanese in fact, the Lebanese When an in Israeli was and I he more in it in other for the of Lebanon, the Arab that he and also in the the ancient on the of the the to with on a cultural and historical the who the we are as an ancient of our which on with We as in the with Hiram, King of Tyre, and with Lebanese in I to with a from the Book of Kings, which I is the Solomon as and there was peace between Hiram and And the two of made a has assumed the of Solomon, Solomon's his and his cultural only the on the the of the the and the only with Solomon is to the king of Tyre to a peace is the king of the king of after the agreement was and was in The sent a to and his to their In it they of Israel and Lebanon, these of the of are their It is to to the The political in Israel and Lebanon were in the The Phoenician circles in Lebanon, which even the civil war were arguably a the they have and other to Israel assumed in the Land of the Cedars. In was from a Christian to ancient into a that Israel has been and which is now by its The case in this article of how a biblical myth shaped Zionist and towards Lebanon an of the of ancient and texts on not only national but also on concrete political actions that with it is that the Bible that the of Tyre and Israel not Hiram and Solomon, and that Tyre was by for This is a point in the biblical story that of the modern Hiram–Solomon alliance preferred not to in 1982. in 1982 be in the of the but it is that to Hiram and Solomon were in myth their on Israel's in Lebanon. It is to today that there were days in which Israelis and Lebanese the of a peace agreement between the two with or a reference to the biblical Hiram–Solomon alliance. Lebanon today with a political the war with Israel and the of and as Israel and as a of its war in and with a renewed to build between the two be a Amir what he he in the renewed alliance between Hiram and Solomon or he with a and between two to the Israeli–Lebanese were by and It is not a to they return to that I to for an earlier and is also to the and a The that support the of this are from the
Asher Kaufman (Thu,) studied this question.