Linguistic move

To: Director General, Prime Minister’s Office
From: Governmental Naming Committee Coordinator

Under pressure from several members of the Governmental Naming Committee, I hereby contact you once more with respect to the title “West Bank” which has been given to the area located west of the Jordan River which was previously in enemy hands. It is clear to everyone that the word “bank” is unsuitable in this case, all the more so since it is meant to denote a term used by the Government of Jordan, which spans both to the east and to the west of the river.

We believe that every effort must be made, even if belatedly, to uproot this term, which is unsuitable both linguistically and politically.

Please forward the committee’s request to the government and to the prime minister.

Sincerely,
Reuven Alkalai
Governmental Naming Committee Coordinator

I see no requirement to adhere to the name “West Bank”, but the naming committee offers no alternatives. Perhaps ‘Nablus-Hebron Region’?
Y.T. [Yosef Tekoa, MFA Deputy Director-General], September 4

To: Director General, Prime Minister’s Office
From: Minister Bureau Chief

Re: The title “West Bank”

The minister of foreign affairs proposes deferring the decision on the matter until after the [UN General] Assembly. Any linguistic move might be interpreted as annexation.

Sincerely

Shimoni

Re: Title for administered territories

1. Below is a copy of the letter of Col. Shlomo Gazit on the matter:
   1. As per the directive issued by the minister of defense, the term “liberated territories” may not be used in IDF documents.
   2. As a rule, geographic names are to be used – Sinai, Judea, Samaria, etc.
   3. In any case a collective term for the entire territories needs to be used, the legal term used by the IDF is “held territories”.
2. Please issue suitable directives accordingly.

Ruchama Tsafrir, Captain
Bureau Secretary

[Moshe] Ben Zeev [Attorney General]

I should like for a resolution that does not necessitate a decision on the matter to pass. Though it may be slightly inelegant, it is still preferable to holding an argument in the Knesset on whether to call the area “the West Bank” or “Samaria and Judea”. […]

[To:] Mr. Shlomo Hillel, Deputy Director General, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

It seems to me that there should be a distinction between expressions used when advocating with diplomats, journalists etc. and the common – Hebrew – term used internally. Within the IDF, the accepted expression has a “legal” meaning as it appears in directives, orders, procedures, etc. Any change to that expression would further complicate this complex system and it appears to me a switch from “held” to “administered” is not such that renders the effort feasible. […]

Shlomo Gazit – Colonel.

Dr. Chaim Gavriyahu, Chair of the Society for Biblical Research in Israel writes to me in his letter:

“I ask you, my friend, the minister of defense, to review the proposal to name the areas of the Land of Israel the IDF entered during the Six Day War “Judea and Ephraim” (rather than “Judea and Samaria”). The historical name of the main part of this area, settled by tribes descendants from Joseph, was “Land of Ephraim”, “Ephraim Mountain”, “Ephraim’s Estate” and the likes. The name “Land of Samaria” was given by Assyrian rule, which conquered the land and settled foreigners in it. […]”

Moshe Dayan