The volatile situation escalated into a war a few years later. In the month of June, 1967, the Sinai Peninsula, Golan Heights, Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem and the West Bank were invaded by Israel. This set-off the six day war. The defences of the Arab countries were less advanced compared to the state-of-the-art Israeli artillery and transport. So, the Arab States were thoroughly defeated within the span of six days. With it, the geopolitical stakes of the United States in the Middle East changed.
Events, of late, had profoundly changed the nature of the Israeli-American partnership. Previously, American support in Arab-Israeli conflicts was Israel’s primary interest. For America, it was the advantage it could gain in its global cold war with U.S.S.R. was the chief motive. Israeli culture and political setup resonated with that of the United States’. So, all these made Israel a desirable ally, the collapse of the U.S.S.R. had changed the equations drastically and the United States no longer has the same incentive to stick its neck out for its friend. In this new scenario, the United States should consider the issue of Palestinian statehood independently of other parties and should implement it roadmap to peace initiative with the interests of the Palestinians in mind. The solutions are to be found in UN Resolutions 194 and 242. In the long run, a peaceful and stable Middle East would serve America more than anyone else, especially in the contemporary world where Islamic fundamentalism and international terrorism are on the rise. (Fernandez)
Viewed in this light, the economic imperialism of the present day is a sophisticated form of militaristic imperialism of yester-centuries; United States being at the forefront of this wave. It was not simply a matter of plundering wealth, but of preserving long-standing systemic conditions for retaining power and privilege within the neo-imperialist society. In the American context (the only remaining superpower), almost all Presidents, including McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge were party to this phenomenon. Though masked in the rhetoric of aversion to old-fashioned imperialism and its hopes for world peace, the centrepiece of its strategy remains economic expansionism. And, to execute that strategy the imperialist government will do all it can in “pushing and holding open doors in all parts of the world with all the engines of government ranging from polite coercion to the use of arms”
The 1973 War between Israel and the Arab nations of Egypt and Syria is directly related to the Six-Day War that took place six years earlier. While the actual attrition is restricted to the middle-east region, the conflict has had broader implications for the then existing world order. Also known as the Yom Kippur War or Ramadan War, the reasons for the initiation of the war are not purely local. In other words, cold-war tension was palpable during the war as a result of the United States support of Israel and the U.S.S.R.’s support of its rivals. Richard Nixon (the President) and Henry Kissinger (a senior member of the Nixon Administration) have had significant roles to play in the manner in which the war eventually played out. Both Nixon and Kissinger dealt with the situation in a cautious and diplomatic manner. The Middle-east region offered economic advantages to its trading partners due to the abundant energy resources available in its terrain. More importantly, it is of strategic importance to both the super-powers, as maintaining dominance over the world order is not possible without controlling the region. By the end of the military conflict the cold-war power alignments had been altered. Egypt’s pre-war leaning toward the Soviet Union had weakened as a result of the war. The war also brought to light Syria’s support for Arabs. By the end of the war, popular cynicism of the Israel government reached its peak both domestically and internationally, leading to the resignation of top leaders. On a more positive note, it had become the United States’ responsibility to ensure peace in the region; as a result of its increased dependency of resources in the Middle-east.