• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Arab-Israeli Conflict Sources Questions

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

History coursework 1. The author of the book looks at the situation from many different angles. I think that he/she does knowledge that Israel was the first to use arms, but suggests she was justified in doing so because the Arab states, especially Egypt, were directly aggressive towards her. The Author states that Egypt closing the gulf of Aquaba was a direct act of aggression, and suggests future violence towards Israel, probably using arms. Had Israel not defended herself so early on, she might have been defeated by the Arab states that surrounded her. The author say: "it comes down to whether you think Israel was justified in attacking Egypt when and how she did". This shows that he/she does blame Israel for staring the actual fighting. However, the author suggests that this was in self-defence rather than an act of aggression. Although the Author does place the entire blame on any one particular party, he/she suggests that Egypt was the first to commit an act of aggression, and therefore holds more of the blame than the other countries. 2. The cartoon suggests that the Israelis had no hope of remaining in Israel, because the Arab states around her (represented by the cannons with the names of the states written on them in Arabic) were united in their plight to remove her from the Middle East. The fact that the states are represented by cannons suggests that the Arabian countries would probably go about removing Israel by force. ...read more.

Middle

4. Source E is suggesting that any military action Egypt might take against Israel, it is justified in doing so, as it is defending its Arab neighbour, Syria, rather than being aggressive towards Israel. However, Sources F and G are both very aggressive towards Israel. They suggest that any military action taken against Israel is aggressive, rather than in self-defence. The sources, although all from Arab leaders, none of the leaders are from the same Arab state. Sources F and G do contradict source E in saying that they are acting aggressively rather than in self-defence, as source E suggests. The two latter sources do not, however, prove the former false because they are all taken from different nations. As it was Egyptian troops that moved across Sinai source E is more relevant. However, Egypt needed to protect their reputation, and as it was their troops who advanced, it is likely to have a spin on it, so that Egypt is portrayed in a more positive light. 5. Both sources are of use to a historian in studying the causes of the 6-day war. However, source I is probably more reliable than source H. Both Sources are primary evidence, which would be very helpful to the historian. Source H is potentially biased because it is written by an Israeli, whose sympathies are likely to fall towards his own country and perhaps cause him to exaggerate the atrocities committed by Egypt. ...read more.

Conclusion

I think that, like source A says, Although Israel were the first to use arms, The Arab states were the aggressors and were responsible for starting the war, Egypt the most aggressive of the Arab states. 8. There is a lot of disagreement over who is to blame for the day war because it is a very complicated issue with many parties involved. For example, the main counties involved would not be so much of a threat to each other had other counties not been arming them. It is hard to say if they were a threat to each other because of the arms (in which case the arms suppliers would be to blame for the war) or if they were a threat to each other because they themselves were aggressive towards each other (in which case it would be the countries themselves that were to blame). It is also hard to know how far to trace to conflict back to find the original aggressor because the land of Israel has been fought over for many years. Some might say that when deciding who caused the 6-day war one should only look at the parties immediately involved. However, the conflict could be traced back to when England and France first divided the land, sparking the arguments of whom the land rightful owners were. Because the conflict can be traced back so far, there is no definite starting point to it, which also makes it hard to place the blame on any one particular party. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 essays

  1. The Arab-Israeli conflict.

    The Jews do believe the attack was a legitimate military operation, and the Arabs do believe the attack was a cold-blooded massacre, thus, the sources differ because the views differ. 2) There has been significant Palestinian refugee problem for the last fifty years.

  2. The Origins of the First World War - Sources Questions

    It called for a German dominated Mitteleuropa (Middle Europe) and also stated ambitions for colonial acquisitions in Africa. Fischer suspected that these plans formulated during the July Crisis itself. He suggested that Germany deliberately went to war in 1914 in order to achieve these aims.

  1. How far do you agree that Israeli victories in successive Arab-Israeli conflicts in the ...

    After the First Arab-Israeli War there was a period of triumph for Israel. During this period Israel's population grew sufficiently. The population of Israel rose from about 650,000 to 1.3 million between 1948 and 1951 as over 680,000 immigrants moved into Israel.

  2. Missile Defence

    A lot of these contractors hire retired generals or high ranking military personnel to sit on their boards(cite eriterian). This tactic keeps everyone connected and eases the chances of getting lucrative contracts and go ahead to military projects. The reigning superpower, the United States would only be attacked using Weapons of mass destruction only in act of desperation.

  1. Hiroshima Coursework This piece of coursework will concentrate on three questions, all source based.

    The first source I will study is source A. this is a photograph of what Hiroshima looked like one day after the bomb.

  2. History of the United States

    all barriers to trade; an end to secret diplomacy; general disarmament; self-government for the submerged nationalities in the German and Austro- Hungarian empires; and a league of nations. The addition of more than a million American troops to the Allied armies turned the balance against the Germans in 1918, and an armistice on November 11 ended the war.

  1. American History.

    - In education two major changes reflected the new concern for raising good citizens: (1) some northern states began using tax money to support public elementary schools and (2) schooling for girls was improved. Judith Sargent Murray was the big theorist on women's education - she claimed that men and

  2. The USA played a much more significant role than the USSR in the Arab-Israeli ...

    As usual the financial gain though obtaining oil was a similar objective for the Soviets to the Americans. Having established motive we precede to the super powers actions and aids, thus establishing the importance and effectiveness of these aids, either financially, economically or militarily in relation to the conflict.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work