Lester B. Pearson and the Suez Canal Crisis

1449 Words Dec 20th, 2013 6 Pages
The Suez crisis was a conflict that could have easily turned into a third World War. With a battle between the Israelis and Egyptians at Sinai, the British and French invasion of Egypt, and nuclear threats from the Soviet Union, all of the elements were present to escalate the conflict and pull other countries into the fray. Canada had no direct ties to the Suez crisis, in terms of control or economic interest. However, Canadian Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Lester B. Pearson, persuaded the UN General Assembly to send in the United Nations Emergency Force. Even though Lester B. Pearson dismayed the Commonwealth with his measures for peace, Canada was recognized for starting the first ever United Nations Peacekeeping mission. …show more content…
The Israeli advance towards the canal is a fake to show the world that Egypt in danger of being overthrown by the Israelis. The British and French then dissimulate as peacekeepers, trying to diffuse then tension between Egypt and Israel. They offer Nasser an ultimatum: “Israel and Egypt are to cease fighting or the two Western powers will intervene”. On the 31st of October this ultimatum expires and France and Britain attack, bombing Alexandria and sending in thousands of troops. Russia then threatens Britain and France with Nuclear weapons. At this point it looks as though the world is on the brink of another World War.

Canada had no interest to the Suez crisis, in terms of control, economic or military interest, but Lester B. Pearson saw an opportunity to intervene. While the Cabinet in Ottawa debated about the attack on Egypt, the UN Security Council met in New York. Even though Canada did not have a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council, Lester B. Pearson and the Foreign Affairs delegation of Canada worked towards building an agreement for the proposal to the UN, on the Suez Crisis. Encouraged by the US, Yugoslavia makes a “Uniting for Peace resolution”, which enables a debate to be moved to the General Assembly. The UK and France do not block this, however, negative votes would not constitute a veto. The Suez Canal
Open Document