432
edits
Changes
m
{{Mediawiki:kindleoasis}}[[File:Ammunition_Hill_Museum_Exhibits_P1010035.jpeg|thumbnail|370px|left|Israeli Airstrike near the August-Victoria Hospital]]
insert middle ad
__NOTOC__
Six days in June 1967 forever altered the landscape of the Middle East. Many of the modern conflicts in the region find their roots in the dramatic changes of that period. A multitude of consequences continue to shape interactions between Israelis, Palestinians, Arabs and the rest of the world. However, major political, economic, demographic and social changes took place immediately after the conflict. Specifically, political legitimacy, the occupied territories and Middle Eastern identity experienced vast transformations. Those transformations, in addition to United States involvement, would significantly impact foreign affairs for years to come.
==Background==
In early 1967, Syria and Israel had been fighting about water rights (specifically the Jordan River). As a show of pan-Arabism (a secular Arab identity), Egyptian President Gamal Nasser blocked Israeli from accessing the Red Sea for shipping. Israelis viewed this as an act of war since the entrance to the Red Sea was considered to be an international waterway. The 1967 (also known as Six-Day War) began on June 5, 1967 as Israel pre-emptively attacked Egypt’s air force. Over the next few days it destroyed 90% of the Egyptian air force while crippling Syria’s air force as well. Israeli ground troops also forced Jordanian troops out of Jerusalem. On June 7, a ceasefire was declared.<ref>James Gelvin, <i>[https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/019021886X/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=019021886X&linkCode=as2&tag=dailyh0c-20&linkId=a348102b182443dc162caeeffedfb623 The Modern Middle East: A History ]</i> (Oxford University Press, 2008), 273</ref>
==Political Changes==
==Changes to Identity==
These changes in politics and geography altered not only Israeli and Palestinian identity, but reversed the advances of pan-Arabism. After Nasser’s self-perceived failure, he briefly resigned from the presidency. However, he still clung to the ideals of pan-Arabism when calling for a united Arab response to remove Israeli aggression.<ref>Nasser’s resignation broadcast, as quoted in Walter Laqueur and Barry Rubin (ed) The Israel-Arab Reader (Penguin, 2001), 104</ref> He specifically mentioned the United Arab Republic, comprised of Syria and Egypt. It is surprising that he would mention a republic that had only lasted three years before disunity broke it apart. This disenchantment with an Arab state would continue after the war as many Arabs questioned the success of an Arab state following such an overwhelming defeat by a non-Arab and non-Islamic people.
<dh-ad/>
Trouble among Middle Eastern nations only continued after 1967. In 1970, Jordan and Syria began a conflict with each other which resulted in an Arab Summit mediated by Nasser.<ref>Bassil A. Mardelli, Middle East Perspectives: From Lebanon (1968–1988) (iUniverse, 2012), 133</ref> The major issue on the table was how Arab states needed to live and work together in a world radically changed by the 1967 War. Interestingly, at this time Nasser had been changing his policies of non-alignment and pan-Arabism probably to suit the growing Arab crisis. The self-scrutiny of Nasser and the Arab states created support for Islamization, identity and government based on the religion of Islam rather than pan-Arabism, a more secular identity which strove for a single Arab state.
