The Importance Of The Suez Crisis

This led to scarce food supplies, forced labor, and mistreatment of the peasantry, so Egypt was ready for a revolt at the end of the war. The Egyptian nationalist elites decided to form a Wafd (meaning ‘delegation’ in Arabic) party under the leader Sa’d Zaghlul that rid the British in 1936 from the Suez Canal. However, they did very little to alleviate the misery of the majority. Rather, Egyptian politicians held office just to increase their own family fortune and had no time for land reforms and public works projects that the peasantry desperately needed. Thus, the Egytian revolution led to backwardness.

Not many people recognize what the Suez Crisis is, but to those who do, they all know that Lester B. Pearson played a crucial role in the neutralization of the situation. In 1956 3 , Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal, thus triggering a crisis. Britain and France soon joined in a coalition along with Israel, in order to topple the Egyptian government. The invasion was halted due to pressure from the U.N. Lester B. Pearson understood that France, Britain and Israel could not all hold onto the Suez Canal without consequences, most thought of a war of some sort. He also understood that the war would cause NATO and the Commonwealth to crack under the pressure. Knowing this, Lester B. Pearson convinced the U.N. peacekeeping force in an impressive 57-0 4 fashion, thus diffusing the Suez Crisis altogether. For his contributions, he was awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace. This is a defining moment in Canadian history and is often regarded as the start to Canada’s humble and nice keeping persona and it all started because of this man.

While the French were rather skilled in that area, as seen in the construction of the Suez canal, relations between the two countries were not the best. As the Siamese saw it, the French benefits from this the most and it implies that Britain and France have teamed up in order to slowly chip away at them. However, this project was never implemented.

Some of the motivations were seen with positive attitudes about the acquisition with the pro imperialist who benefited the economy in documents 2, 5, and 12. During the acquisition, the purchase of the Suez Canal was seen more of a positive attitude towards the government it was a nationalistic attitude. Benjamin Disraeli discusses

The Suez Crisis, about 60 years ago, was the world’s first designated UN peacekeeping mission. It was a significant advance within the United Nations and

BBC Documentary. "The Other Side of Suez." Youtube. Video file, 55:59. July 22, 2012. Accessed May 19, 2013. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETOUALw2EIs.

Document 4 explains nationalization of of African territories. Following the conclusion of the Second World War, the Egyptians decided to pass laws in order to evacuate the British military from the Suez Canal area. As implied in Document 4, during the month of July 1956, President Gamal Abdel Nasser exemplified the nationalization of the area. Nasser perceived that if here were to bring nationalism to the Suez Canal, then he could assign a fee to the citizens that were not welcome. With this fee, he would influence the construction of a newly structured dam, hovering the Nile River of Egypt. Nasser understood that by nationalizing this canal, the world, and especially the British and French stockholders that were in ownership of the Canal Company would be taken aback. Even though President Nasser pledged that Canal Company would receive a significant amount of affluence for the loss of their property, the British, French, and Israeli societies decided that they would initiate a procedure to re-obtain their company, and overthrow Nasser. These countries formed a secret alliance, historically known as the tripartite collusion. The Israel society decided that they would engage in procedures opposing the Egyptian society in hopes of obtaining approval from many of the western nations. This was because they were limited on resources, not very well developed, and were very fearful of being authorized by an Arabian

The Suez Crisis was an incident that first commenced on the 29th of October, 1956, in which Israeli military forces entered the Sinai Peninsular and attacked Egyptian positions, driving them back. By the next day, Israeli forces had reached the Suez Canal, after taking a majority of the Sinai Peninsular. (Best, Hanhimaki, Maiolo & Schulze, 2008, p.432). Britain and France then both issued an ultimatum, for both Israeli and Egyptian forces to withdraw from the Suez Canal, citing its safety from the violence of war as extremely important. After Gamal Abder Nasser, Egypt’s President at the time, rejected the ultimatum, on the 30th

Egypt’s subjection to Hyksos rule had disrupted their feelings of safety, and thus enabled their awareness of security. This is first seen in Ahmose I’s introduction of buffer regions between Egypt and its Asian enemies. Furthermore, Egypt’s subjugation of foreign threats in efforts to assure prevention of future invasion reflects their new mentality. These actions exemplify Egypt’s adoption of an imperialist policy, accomplished by their adoption of Hyksos weaponry. Accordingly, M. Hayes exemplifies the impact of the Hyksos in stating that the new “warrior pharaoh’s would conquer to the limits of the world to ensure Egypt was as safe as it had once been.” Thus, the Hyksos occupation had impacted the Egyptian’s political power and in turn influenced their policy on foreign powers.

The Suez crisis was Canada’s first peacekeeping mission. The war started on July 26, 1956. When the president of egypt, Gamal Abdel Nesser, declared the Suez Canal to be nationalized. An American and Britian company owned the Canal. Once the company said they wouldn’t help the Suez canal financially

These benefits would further lead to improvements of their country’s economy, dominance, natural resources, and transportation of goods and materials like oil. However, in the end, the creation of alliances was unsuccessful for Britain, Israel, and France considering the aftermath of the Suez Crisis. The dispute did not resulted in the favor of the three nations, and was not what they had expected because France, Israel, and Britain were forced to cease fire by the United States and the United Nations. On the other hand, Egypt remained in full control over the canal, and the conflict was the mark of the continuing gradual development of independence from the Western World in Arab nations (Pearce 219). As for Britain and France’s status in the world, the invasion had been a bad move for them, and was the signal and indication of their constant decline in being the global powers of the

Background: In the midst of the Cold War and the Arab-Israeli conflict, conflict arose over Gamal Abdel Nasser’s nationalization of the Suez Canal. This was of particular concern due to Nasser’s increased connection with the Soviet Union, through the Czech Arms agreement and the Aswan Dam. Following Nasser’s nationalization of the Suez Canal, Great Britain, France, and Israel invaded Egypt. In facing this crisis, the U.S. had to consider Cold War politics with the Soviet Union, relations with Arab and Israeli nations, and relations with the invading powers

The Egyptians were experts at trading, importing and exporting goods with various countries. Due to its geographical location, Ancient Egypt was able to obtain great success through trading and commerce. The Nile River provided many inlets into the Red Sea and Mediterranean Sea, these passages allowed for greater opportunities for trading and communication with neighboring countries. The use of vessels proved to be a great resource in securing the Egyptian economy with its vast amount of riches, providing the main mode of transportation for trade and travel. This paper will examine Ancient Egypt’s relation with the Nile River and the trade and commerce that secured it as one of the greatest nations in history (Baines, 2002).

In 1956, Gemal Abdul Nassir announced that he wanted the nationalization of the Suez Canal. This canal has been operated by Britain and France since the 18th century and due to this, tensions rose between Egypt, Britain and France. Israel regarded Gemal Abdul Nassir as a threat to its national security and due to this it was easy for Britain and France to convince Israel in the invasion of Egypt and the overthrowing of its president. Israel invaded Sinai Peninsula, Britain and France landed their troops later on the pretence of separating the fighting parties. This was the start of the Suez crisis. The USA condemned their actions and forced the three parties to withdraw and this made it possible

The Suez war began in 1956 when the President Gamal Abdel Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal. Due to the canal’s great importance to the British and they colluded with Israel and France to regain control of the canal. The Suez Canal was especially important to the British because it connected the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean through the Red Sea. (Milner) This strategic location allowed them to trade and move across the world giving them control of their colonies. However, on July 26, 1956 President Nasser decided to nationalize the Suez Canal due to his anger at the British for withdrawing their loan offer to Egypt. (Milner) Consequently, the nationalization of the canal was a strategic move to lessen the British’s economic and political control of Egypt, which had lasted since 1882. Many Egyptians were unhappy with British’s occupation of their country so Nasser’s policies were popular in the Middle East. This was because the “expression of national