# data[].attributes.body
It was difficult for Nassar to tone down his Arab-nationalism stance as he had been pursuing this legitimacy intensely. He would lose the support of the people if he were to go against his own words, being seen as betraying his own cause. Nassar further entrenched Arab nationalist and anti-western imperialism. In 1967, he demanded UN forces to retreat withdraw from Sinai. This deepened Israeli fears of an imminent attack due to increasing tensions and sought American aid.

# data[].attributes.body
Nasser was leader of the Arab League, so he faced pressure from the Arab states to continue his aggressive rhetoric in the Middle East. Without doing so, he could potentially lose credibility and influence among the Arab states. Hence, to maintain his position, he had to continue his rhetoric

How it led to 6-day War: Israel felt threatened by Nasser's rhetoric and believed that they faces imminent destruction. As an act to survive, Israel decided to attack the Arab states, starting the 6-day war.

# data[].attributes.body
Nasser was the leader of the Arab League, so toning down his anti-israel stance would mean that his reputation would take a hit in the Arab world. Such actions he took included forming the Palestinian Liberation Organisation, where he aimed to coordinate efforts for palestinian groups and advocated for an armed struggle against israel. Nasser's brinkmanship such as moving troops into the sinai peninsula and closing the straits of tiran to israeli shipping acted as the trigger as it symbolised an imminent arab attack, leading to the outbreak of the six day war .

# data[].attributes.body
Nasser wld be shamed if he toned it down

--> cld have been seen as a betrayal to Arab-nationalism and Arab states

--> founded pan-Arab nationalism and was likely the symbol? of that so it wld be hypocritical to back down, Egypt was also the centre of pan-Arab nationalism

Israel increasingly saw this as a threat and led them to take action against the Arab states

# data[].attributes.body
Reputation - The atmosphere in the Arab world was extremely pro-Palestinian and called for unity against Israel. If Nassar turned down his support for Palestine, then he would be criticised by the Arabs as being accommodating to Israel/betraying the Arab cause, which would be problematic for his domestic support in his own country. Nasser was also a champion of pan-Arab nationalism and a hero of the Arab world(and changing his stance would hurt his already strong supporter base)

Territory - Nasser wanted to regain the Sinai Peninsula that was lost to Israel in the Suez Crisis in order to have a buffer state against Israel and protect its economic rights over the Suez Canal. Nasser also viewed the restoration of the Sinai Peninsula as a huge PR win that would solidify his pan-Arab stance.

Because Nasser kept increasing tensions, Israel was under the assumption that Nasser was going to attack, hence they did a pre-emptive strike on Egypt, starting the six-day war.

# data[].attributes.body
- nasser was the leader of pan arab league. he was propagandist a very anti israeli stance, so it was difficult for him to switch sides. the competing nationalisms of zionism VS arab nationalism. he also was sunk cost from nationalising the suez canal and could not turn back no longer.

# data[].attributes.body
Nasser encouraged the countries in the Middle East to be unyielding and uncompromising towards Israel as he believed Israel's existence was a fundamental threat to Palestinian existence. It was hard for him to 'tone down' his message as he would need to continue to save face and remain headstrong in his belief, if he did not, it would look like Nasser was bending a knee to Israel and not taking responsibility for Palestine on behalf of the Arabs.

This would eventually lead to war in 1967 as Nasser's aggressive rhetoric severely hindered negotiations and lessened the chance of a peaceful resolution. War seemed inevitable and the only option for both sides.

# data[].attributes.body
Nasser was portraying an Arab nationalism rhetoric. He was the president of Egypt, which was an Arab state. This meant that if he did tone down on his Anti-Israel stance, he would lose credibility and standing as president of the Arab state.

# data[].attributes.body
Nasser is the head of the Arab League and has to keep his reputation in order to stay in command in the Middle East

issues against Israel like the Palestinian issue and the Sinai Peninsular issue

# data[].attributes.body
His supporters were very for the notion of Arab-nationalism

Hence, if he were to tone down his anti-Israeli stance, his supporters would see him as betraying the Arab world and he would lose power

Furthermore, as Nasser "founded" the pan-Arab nationalism idea, thus becoming a symbol of Arab-nationalism itself. It would be ironic if the founder of the movement himself backed down from his claims against the greatest threat to the Arab world at that moment

This means that he built a "trap" for himself in which he could not be less aggressive as it would cause his power base in Egypt and the Arab world as a whole to crack

# data[].attributes.body
Nasser was a strong advocate for pan arab nationalism, where he propagated strong arab national unity among nations, due to past sentiments against israel, it made nasser take a strong anti israel stance as it provides a strong justification and rallying point among arab states for them to avenge their past greviances such as the first arab israel war. Hence it made nasser unable to stray away from anti israel policies and stance.

It led to the war because of the water conflict over control of the Jordan River between Israel and Syria that contributed to four major border clashes. Nasser needs to step in to maintain his political stance to prove himself or else he would lose the leadership in the Arab nationalism

# data[].attributes.body
Nasser’s pan-Arab, anti-Israel rhetoric tied his political legitimacy to confrontation, making it difficult to moderate without losing credibility and pushing him into symbolic escalations that removed diplomatic exit options and led to the 1967 war.

# data[].attributes.body
Nasser would have seen as betraying the Arab cause and being inferior to Israel. It also undermines his claim to lead the arab world. Cold War dynamics meant that Nasser relied heavily on Soviet arms and support, which means that they could not back down against Israel who were supported by the USA.

# data[].attributes.body
His inability to tone down his anti-Israel stance resulted in extreme actions taken against Israel as Egypt was perceived as the leading Arab nation. As such, when there was information of Israel’s imminent attack on Syria, despite the unreliability of the information, Nasser had no choice but to take action and defend his fellow Arab state from invasion, so as to protect his standing as President of the leading Arab nation.

# data[].attributes.body
Beginning with the Suez Crisis, Nasser had been seen as a hero of the Arab world, who had championed for pan-Arab nationalism, supporting unity between Arab states, and was strongly against Israel, who they saw as an extension of western colonialism

This would make it hard for him to tone down his rhetoric against Israel, as it would seem as if he was betraying the pan-Arab cause.

The conflicting nationalist ideas between the Arab states and Israel led to intense tensions, which would eventually culminate in a crisis in 1967 when Nasser demanded the withdrawal of UN forces from the Sinai and closed the straits of Titan to Israel, which paved the war for the Six Day War