The view from the high ground of the Golan Heights

Standing atop the windswept Golan Heights, one can see why this plateau has been strategic territory since biblical times. The ancient phrase "from Dan to Beersheba" defined the northern and southern boundaries of historical Israel, with Dan situated in northern part of Israel. This biblical geography plays a key role in modern diplomatic history, particularly at the 1920 San Remo Conference when British Prime Minister David Lloyd George referenced it while proposing the framework for the Jewish National Home.

From Dan to Beersheba is used nine times in the bible to refer to the settled areas of the tribes of Israel between the city Dan in the North and city of Beersheba in the South. The phrase was used by British politicians such as during negotiation of the borders of Palestine following World War I.  

It describes the ancient boundaries of the United Kingdom of Israel during the time of King David and King Solomon. The British prime minister used a map from Atlas of the Historical Geography of the Holy Land by George Adam Smith to illustrate his point. 

On 13 September 1919, a memorandum was handed from Lloyd George, prime minister of the UK to Georges Clemenceau the prime minister of France which stated that British Palestine would be "defined in accordance with its ancient boundaries of Dan to Beersheba".

Archaeological discoveries at Tel Dan have provided compelling evidence that this ancient city, clearly mentioned in biblical texts, served as Israel's historical northern frontier. The remarkable findings include fortifications dating back to the Early Bronze Age, the world's oldest preserved mudbrick arched gate, and most significantly, the Tel Dan Stele – a ninth-century BCE inscription that contains the earliest known extrabiblical reference to the "House of David."

The Dan River is the main headwater river of the Jordan River and originates at the base of Mount Hermon near Tel Dan in Israel

The San Remo Conference's vision for the Jewish national homeland was explicitly anchored to this historical geography. When the great powers divided the Ottoman Empire's former territories after World War I, they initially included the Golan Heights within Mandatory Palestine. However, in what now appears to have been a significant miscalculation, Britain ceded that territory to France in the Franco-British Agreement of 1923. This transfer wasn't based on historical or strategic considerations but rather on remarkably casual grounds: a local Bedouin chief's preference to remain under French rule.

This administrative decision would prove costly. From 1948 to 1967, when Syria controlled the Heights, the region became a military stronghold from which Syrian forces repeatedly shelled Israeli civilians in the Hula Valley below. The vulnerability of Israel's position was stark: a mere 60 miles separated the western Golan from Haifa and Acre, Israel's industrial heartland. This precarious situation persisted until the 1967 Six-Day War, when Israel captured the territory in what most military historians regard as a defensive necessity and in line with international law.  

The aftermath of the 1973 Yom Kippur War brought a remarkable development that would ensure five decades of relative calm. The May 1974 Agreement on Disengagement established a buffer zone monitored by the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF). This 80-kilometer strip, varying between 0.5 and 10 kilometers in width, has proven remarkably effective. UNDOF's mandate encompasses maintaining the ceasefire, supervising the disengagement of forces, and overseeing areas of separation and limitation.

What makes this arrangement particularly noteworthy is its longevity and cost-effectiveness. Operating on a modest annual budget of approximately $65.5 million, UNDOF has maintained peace along one of the world's most volatile borders for half a century. The force's work includes regular patrols, permanent observation posts, and bi-weekly inspections of military locations.

Perhaps the most surprising aspect of the Golan story has been Israel's humanitarian engagement with Syria, particularly during the Syrian civil war. Operation Good Neighbor, launched in June 2016, provided extensive medical care to Syrian civilians, treating over 4,000 people, including hundreds of children. The initiative delivered everything from medical supplies to basic necessities, demonstrating that even amid official hostility, human connections can flourish.

This humanitarian engagement has helped foster more positive relations between the two nations at the grassroots level. As one Syrian aid recipient wrote from an Israeli hospital, "The people of Syria want peace with Israel. To any Syrians that think that Israel is our enemy -- you are wrong."

The legal status of Israel's presence in the Golan has strengthened significantly. In 2019, the United States recognized Israeli sovereignty over the territory, acknowledging both historical claims and modern strategic realities. This decision wasn't creating new facts but rather recognizing what military and diplomatic experts had long understood: some borders are drawn not just in diplomatic ink but in the unchangeable stone of geography and history.

Critics who cite international law often point to the UN Charter's prohibition on territorial acquisition by force. However, this overlooks the unique historical context of the Golan—territory that was originally designated for the Jewish state, arbitrarily transferred to the French mandate, and then used as a platform for aggression against Israel for two decades.

Looking ahead, prospects for peaceful relations between Israel and Syria appear cautiously optimistic, built on the foundation of humanitarian cooperation and five decades of successful buffer zone management. The UNDOF mission stands as a testament to how international peacekeeping can work when properly implemented and supported. Syrian rebel leader al-Jolani has publicly stated Syria will honor 1974 ceasefire agreement which is encouraging.

As the situation continues to develop, the Golan Heights serves as a reminder that international law must be interpreted within historical context. The territory's return to Israeli control represents not a violation of international norms but rather a restoration of its intended status under the original post-World War I settlement. In this light, Israel's position aligns with both historical precedent and the practical requirements of regional stability.