The Suez Canal was opened inafter ten years of work financed by the French and Egyptian governments. The canal instantly became strategically important, as it provided the shortest ocean link between the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean. The canal eased commerce for trading nations and particularly helped European colonial powers to gain and govern their colonies.
Sigler In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for Neil Patrick Tubb Date: Introduction Among the most important foundations in the continuing Arab-Israeli conflict was the seeds that were sown in the aftermath of the Sinai Campaign, or the Suez Crisis.
Whatever the operation is referred to as, its consequences involving both relations internal to the Middle East and with the world are impossible to ignore.
Looked at simply as an objective event in history, one could note several key outcomes of the war. It marked the beginning of the end of British and French colonial leadership in the region, and the start of an increasingly high American and Soviet involvement.
The war also proved to the Arab nations of the area that the Israeli military machine was not one to be taken lightly, a lesson which would be forgotten and retaught in the "Six Day War". This paper, however, will not have the goal of examining these specific events in relation to the war, nor will it try to determine which factors were most significant.
My aim will be to gain a more complete understanding of the effect of the crisis by reviewing key events of the war from two different perspectives: Through a brief comparison of both the coverage of the War by the differing authors and the varying interpretations seen throughout my study, I will be best able to make an informed evaluation on how the event was, and is today, seen in the political and historical forum.
Comparison of Coverage The war, which was begun on October 29, when the Israelis moved their units into the Sinai peninsula, has had its origins traced back to many historical events. Which is the most important of these is a point of contention for the authors I have studied.
There does seem to be for all parties involved a consensus that the ascent to power of Gamal Abdel Nasser to President of Eqypt inand his move to nationalize the Suez Canal as the main precipitating factor in setting off the conflict.
Why Nasser did this, however, is where my various sources diverge. Quite predictably, sources used from the Egyptian or Arab viewpoint usually pointed to the fact that Nasser was finally freeing a Third World country from the clinging grip of colonial Europe, where Britain and France continued to control much of the Egyptian economy.
There is most likely no doubt that Nasser did nationalize the Suez Canal for partly political motives, and as the already crowned leader of "Pan-Arabism", it seemed that he was showing the world that he was ready to let his deeds match his words.
Political decisions are rarely one dimensional, and my Arab sources also indicated other reasons for the move- more of which later. It was with this backdrop that all the parties involved began to examine their options.
Of their motivations and aims, I will refer to in the next section, and on the point of basic facts of the conflict my sources are quite complementary. It is a matter of history that Israel began the conflict by their phased invasion across into the Sinai on October 29,and agreed to a withdrawal on November 6.
None of my readings from either side of this particularly high political fence try to dispute this.
Even that the war was incredibly lopsided and anti-climatic- like it seems so many of these wars were- is not contended by my Arab authors. This surprised me somewhat- as I read from some of the top Egyptian political men of the time and their interpretation of events.
One such former diplomat dispelled any historical illusions which may have been created over time by saying in his memoirs, " The fact wasEgypt had not won a military victory in " Two days after the Israeli invasion, the Anglo-French troops entered the Suez Canal zone and started operation MUSKATEER in order to re-secure control of the area under their joint command.
These invasions were followed by a barrage of international criticism, the most telling of which came from the two superpowers, the United States and the USSR.The Suez Crisis in Terms of U.S Involvement Essay Words 6 Pages In , the United States, led by President Dwight Eisenhower, became self-enveloped in the Suez Canal Crisis involving Israel, Egypt, France, and Great Britain.
Nov 09, · Suez Crisis: Background. The catalyst for the joint Israeli-British-French attack on Egypt was the nationalization of the Suez Canal by Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser in July The. The Suez Crisis in Terms of U.S Involvement Essay Words | 6 Pages In , the United States, led by President Dwight Eisenhower, became self-enveloped in the Suez Canal Crisis involving Israel, Egypt, France, and Great Britain.
The Suez Crisis Essay Sample. The Suez Crisis was certainly one of the more major turning points in Britain’s relationship with her Empire as it led her to realise just how isolated she was, and that although she had her Empire, she did not have any actual allies.
It also effectively led to the eventual decolonisation of all her African colonies. This was for the most part the norm for this essay, with the exception of the one more European text I used to offer me a sense of how the crisis was handled from the Western side.
For this I used W. . The Suez Crisis Of Essay Words | 13 Pages. The Suez Crisis of Introduction Among the most important foundations in the continuing Arab-Israeli conflict was the seeds that were sown in the aftermath of the Sinai Campaign, or the Suez Crisis.