• 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. 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

    Economic benefits of having the national missile defense program. This system provides jobs and a steady income for over ten million Americans in the south and west of the country per year (cite ertierian 36.). there is a strong lobby pushing to activate the missile defense program due to the connections the military industry has with the pentagon.

  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

    Excessive competition and production were blamed for the collapse. Therefore, business proprietors and farmers were allowed to cooperate in establishing prices that would provide them with a profitable return and induce an upward turn (under the NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION and the AGRICULTURAL ADJUSTMENT ADMINISTRATION).

  1. The Arab-Israeli conflict 1956, 1967 and 1973.

    In response to this, the USA provided Israel with vast amounts of the latest weapons and armed equipment. In response to the USA's actions, the Russians airlifted stocks of weapons for Syria and Egypt to help them attack Israel.

  2. American History.

    as they couldn't use their old diplomatic strategy of pitting powers against e/o [only the US was left]. - So anyhow the US went ahead and planned out an organization for the Northwest Territories (Mississippi River, Great Lakes, Ohio River boundaries)

  1. The Arab Israeli Conflict -

    The only way left for us is war. I will have the pleasure and honour to save Palestine" - King Abdullah of Transjordan- 1948. The international reaction to the violence was one of disgust and disbelief, yet it was no surprise that the nations thought that Israel would be destroyed

  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