The Suez Crisis

During the 1950’s, Britain’s rule over Egypt led them to gain joint control over the Suez Canal with the French. However, many Egyptians were tired of Britain’s presence because they felt as if they were second class citizens in their own country. This led to Egypt’s military beginning to pressure Britain’s armies, located in the Canal Zone, so they would leave. Not only were attacks made on the British, but also on Israeli troops along the border between the two countries. Years later, this long and negative history between the nations would eventually lead to the joint decision for Israel, Britain, and France to attack Egypt when Colonel Gamal Abdel Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal in July 1956. As a result, the Suez Crisis ensued. During the course of this paper, I will argue that the Suez Crisis had a greater impact on Britain and Frances’ power as colonizing countries as it exposed significant military weaknesses. I will first discuss in further detail what the Suez Crisis was. Then I will explain the different measures that were taken to maintain peace amongst the nations involved. Lastly, I will discuss the different outcomes Egypt, Britain, France, and Israel faced. When Colonel Nasser replaced General Neguib in 1954 he had three main goals for Egypt. These included: making Egypt independent by ending British occupation, building up the Egyptian forces for an effective attack on Israel, and building the economy by constructing a dam at Aswan which would irrigate the Nile valley. To achieve this first goal, a treaty was signed by Nasser and by Anthony Nutting, British Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, in October 1954. The treaty stated that British troops would be taken out of Egypt by June 1956, and the British bases were to be run mutually by British and Egyptian civilian technicians. In return for this, under the treaty Egypt agreed that there would be freedom of navigation through the canal, and that if the Suez Canal was threatened by any foreign powers, British troops would be allowed to return. This treaty was set to last for seven years. However, Anglo-Egyptian affairs were tense again in February 1955 when, British Prime Minister, Anthony Eden decided he wasn’t going to provide Nasser the British arms that were promised before when Egypt already paid for them. Nasser decided to take matters into his own hands. As the last of Britain’s troops left Egypt, Nasser was in the process of finalizing the purchases of aircrafts made by the Soviet Union, and tanks and artilleries from Czechoslovakia. This helped him proceed a step closer to achieving his second goal of destroying Israel. Despite this deal with the Soviets, Nasser declared “We would have preferred to deal with the West, but for us it was a matter of life and death”. Anglo-Egyptian relations still did not improve. Concern with Nasser's purchase of Soviet arms, caused America to make a futile decision to withdraw its offer of making loans to Egypt. These loans would help fund the construction of the dam at Aswan. John Foster Dulles, the American secretary of state, thought the dam would place too much strain on the resources of newly independent Egypt. Britain then followed America’s lead the next day and did the same. The World Bank then refused to give Egypt a promised $200 million. Nasser was angered, not only because the dam was a key step to modernize Egypt, but because he felt as if there was a conspiracy intent on keeping the Egyptian army weak and limit their freedom of action. He wasn’t going to let that set back stop him, however, as he was determined to proceed with the building of the dam. Nasser believed the Soviet Union had the right knowledge in engineering to help, while the canal would help fund the project by the tolls ships had to pay. As a result, President Nasser nationalized the Anglo-French Suez Canal Company on July 26, 1956. Nasser believed the nationalization of the canal had two objectives. The first was “to provide foreign exchange for Egypt to build the Dam and pursue its developmental plans” while the second was to “demonstrate that small countries need no longer accept public insult and degradation from great powers”. With “Operation Dignity and Glory” offices of the Suez Canal Company were seized. This was ruled to be legal, under international law, as long as shareholders [of the Suez Canal Company] were compensated and there was a freedom of passage for all ships. After Nasser’s announcement to nationalize the canal, Britain, the U.S, and France came together to discuss the escalating crisis. They along with other nations decided to hold an international conference in London but Nasser refused to attend. It was used as an attempt to find a diplomatic solution over the Suez Crisis. There, the team of nations came up with a number of different plans for international control over the canal. “It respected Egyptian sovereignty by accepting the nationalization of the canal” but Nasser rejected all of them. Then Eden, along with the U.S., and France announced plans to form Suez Canal Users’ Association. Although it was rejected by Nasser, at a second conference in London eighteen nations agreed with its formation. However, the efforts of SCUA failed and Israel felt military action needed to be taken. The British were also furious with all of Nasser’s decisions and felt volatile actions needed to be taken. America warned Britain that groundless military action would not be tolerated, however, they sought out France for help on an attack that would retake the canal. Eden figured military action against Egypt would lead to Nasser's downfall and reestablish Britain's influence in the region. Britain, France and Israel secretly came together in what became known as the Tripartite Collusion, although it has been argued that Britain and France never knew what Israel was planning. The meetings was “resented by Eisenhower and Dulles as a personal slap in the face” because they were not informed of it and were kept in the dark. During the meeting, a plan was devised so Britain and France could physically regain control of the canal. Israel was advised to create an attack across the Sinai Peninsula. When Israel reached the canal, Britain and France would give the ultimatum that both Egypt and Israel would withdraw from their sides of the canal. Next the canal would be occupied by French forces so fighting would seize and then they could keep the canal open for shipping. Israeli Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, agreed to the plan but wanted something in return first. He told Britain that Israel would not make any attacks on Egypt unless Britain and France destroyed the Egyptian air force. When U.S. President Eisenhower got wind of these plans, he sent a message to Ben-Gurion asking Israel not to attack and risk endangering the peace. His pleas were ignored, however, as days later Israel attacked Egypt on October 29th, taking complete occupation of
Gaza and Sinai only days later. After Israel’s initial attack, Britain and France followed through with their plan as well and issued the ultimatum. In order to reopen the canal, Britain and France issued a bombing campaign that attacked Egyptian airfields. In response, “the canal was blocked by ships deliberately sunk by the Egyptian authority.” The United Nations then came together in a general assembly to discuss how to handle the situation. British and French forces continued to attack Egypt when they got involved in an airborne invasion of Egypt. Their forces landed at Port Said in northeastern Egypt. The U.S., USSR, and the UN condemned British and French military action so when a vote was taken, it was agreed that the invading powers needed to quit and leave the Egyptian territory. They ended up calling for a cease-fire and withdrawal of all troops. Because of increased U.S. pressure, Eden finally called a cease-fire. Under the direction of the United Nations peacekeeping forces were sent to make sure no more violence ensued. The Tripartite Invasion officially ended as troops were finally withdrawn from the Canal Zone in December. As a result, Egypt was seen as the victor of the war because British and French troops were forced to leave Egypt. It was understood also understood that Israeli troops would eventually leave the area as well. The canal was returned to Egypt's possession and Egyptian sovereignty was recognized. Nasser was viewed as a hero in the Arab world because he conquered European colonialism and Zionism. The Arabs had been watching closely because they knew if Nasser won against the West then the “British influence in the colonies would be destroyed.” Another result of “Nasser’s successful nationalization was certainly to encourage the rapid growth of nationalism in the oil-producing states.” This was not the only result of the Suez Crisis. In the aftermath of the Suez Crisis, there were different outcomes for Britain, France, and Israel. For Britain, Anthony Eden was accused of misleading Parliament and was forced to resign as prime minister. His failed attempt at controlling the crisis in a peaceful manner caused his successes during previous political jobs to be overlooked. This led his successor Maurice Macmillan to make a vast impact on the acceleration of British decolonization. He also strived to gain a good relationship with the U.S. again. However, France’s relationship with the U.S. wasn’t the same. France who was “believed to have led the game, was blamed more than Britain.” They felt betrayed by the U.S. politically so after the crisis they believed they couldn’t trust their allies. However, the United States didn’t betray them because they often “warned that it was opposed to any military operation.” France felt Britain also wasn’t trustworthy because they never informed France they were planning to cease-fire in the midst of war. Many of the French army officer corps even felt they were betrayed by the politicians in Paris. Because of this, later on France was way more determined to win the war against Algeria. They would succeed by any means necessary, even if it meant overthrowing the Fourth Republic. This eventually led to the collapse of the republic in 1958. For both France and Britain, the process of decolonization accelerated. Many of their remaining colonies gained independence over the next several years after the crisis. Israel, on the other hand, gained confidence from the crisis. Israel realized they were capable of executing extensive military schemes, as well as, small raids and anti-revolutionary procedures. Afterwards, Israeli shipping was able to move freely to Asia and Africa because the Straits of Tiran was re-opened. Also, the presence of UN Peacekeepers were secured in Sinai. Overall, Israel escaped the disgrace that Britain and France faced in the end and discovered their own form of power. Based on the presented information, it can be concluded that the Suez Crisis had a great impact on revealing the weaknesses of Britain and France and therefore, no longer making them colonizing powers. It can also be concluded that despite Israel’s alliance during the crisis, they escaped the degradation Britain and France suffered. In fact, it showed they were powerful as well. The crisis also set forth a chain reaction of nations gaining their independence like Egypt. Lastly, the Suez Crisis caused Egypt to be finally taken seriously as they gained control over the Suez Canal.

--------------------------------------------
[ 1 ]. WM Roger Louis and Roger Owen, eds., Suez 1956: The Crisis and its Consequences (New York, 1989) p. 162
[ 2 ]. Ibid., p. 35
[ 3 ]. Ibid., p. 37
[ 4 ]. Ibid.
[ 5 ]. Ibid., p.38
[ 6 ]. Ibid., p. 111
[ 7 ]. Jacques Georges-Picot The Real Suez Crisis (New York, 1975) p. 109
[ 8 ]. Louis and Owen., p. 142
[ 9 ]. Ibid., p. 148
[ 10 ]. Georges-Picot., p. 110
[ 11 ]. Louis and Owen., p. 119
[ 12 ]. Georges-Picot., p. 193
[ 13 ]. Louis and Owen., p. 142
[ 14 ]. Ibid., p. 143