Essay Sample on Suez Crisis of 1956: The New Regime of Trade and Travel

The Suez Canal turned to the subject of the world crisis in 1956. That was the time when Egypt made it under their protectorate (Smith, Simon 22). The Canal opened the sole direct route for travelers and goods from Indian to the Mediterranean Sea. It was an essential route to the movement of trade for the Middle East, Europe, Asia and the U.S. initially; it was a free passage for all countries that were engaged in trading. Later, both France and Britain decided to have control over it for their commercial shipping and also as a way of colonizing the area. Moreover, the government of Egypt reacted to their action by assuming its control of the Suez Canal. That brings some light to the start of the crisis of the Suez Canal, whereby the western power block aligned themselves to take control of the Canal from Egypt.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Smith, Simon asserts that the Canal importance was very strategic because it worked as a lifeline for the British Domain (30). In 1948 when India attained its independent, Canal's lost grip of its customary rationale for the defense of either the empire of India. Subsequently, it turned out to be an oil route and no empire, because it reduced the journey to 6,500 miles from Europe to Persian Gulf Oil. Practically two-thirds of all Oil to Europe passed through the Canal by 1995. Therefore, because of its premeditated worth, it was always tightly protected by the British. It was evident when the British stood in WWII alongside Rommel, all in protection of the Canal.

Nationalism, Colonialism and Nasser. Attires of French and British captains and the Suez Canal Company were some of the visible relics of colonialism which significantly constrained west's struggle for communism. The tolls from the Canals were being directed to the owners in Europe rather than helping the poor Egyptians. The U.S. took note of such visible colonial residues as a serious constrain in frustrating communism, as Nasser looked up to socialism and USSR to help his economy in 1995. As per the treaty, the British were supposed to leave Canal Zone in 1968 (Smith, Simon 32). Nasser demanded to share of Canal incomes in the same proportions as it was the case of Oil agreement of 50-50, but the British declined.

The Suez Canal Nationalization and the aftermath effects. With the help of the Egyptian military, Nasser assumed control and nationalized the Suez Canal on July 26th. Both Paris and Landon felt that Egyptians without proper training they would fail in running the Canal by themselves. Luckily, a team of Egyptians with the help from Russian ship pilots, they managed to maintain the operations of the Canal frequently. French and Britain wished for military intervention, but President Eisenhower was due for elections, and thus he was not ready to engage war (Myers, Elizabeth). Also, he did not wish to inflame Arabs and thus encouraging communist trailblazers.

French perceived Nasser as a danger to their place in North Africa, and both Paris and Landon were persuaded towards military interventions. The loss of Oil in the Middle East for Britain through the Canal would be frugally overwhelming. Additionally, with British trailing their ground in most places, they prioritized on their prestige, and thus they felt using force was an option. With America and Eisenhower taking a sharp turn to solve issues, both French and Britain found themselves in a dilemma.

Surprise attack. Israelis, French and Britain planned on striking Egypt and reports Canal in October 1956. Approximately concurrently a jointly military control was instituted among Jordan, Egypt and Syria. Among other thing which brought panic, the same day diplomats from Israeli, French and British met, coincidentally the Red Army move in Hungary to subdue an uprising against Russian governance. The key players suffered a significant blow before they could execute the plans. Anthony Eden, the British PM, was hospitalized with high fever and Eisenhower suffered a heart attack two months before the planned attack. Both French and British troops failed to set-up a firm foothold, and thus they were compelled to withdrawal in November (Myers, Elizabeth). Without the help of American aid, west Europe realized that they would be out of oil which could be severe trouble during winter. Lastly, at the end of November, Israeli, French and British bowed and bailed out. Consequently, Americans had won and to add humiliation to them, Nasser had also won.

End of Crisis. When France and Britain came together to plan an overthrow of Egypt in Suez Canal control, Nasser aligned himself with USSR; hence a good relationship was achieved. The latter explains why USSR assumed its stand in Egypt's favour in the time of Suez Canal predicament. The emergency supply program in December, a corporative project between oil firms in us and Europe and governments became operational. For it to succeed, a wholesale tankers redeployment to transporting oil most efficiently and quickly. Sugar bowl in Europe ensured an equitable distribution of oil across all the European countries. The oil lift entailed serious logistics and coordination, and it went seamlessly.

IN 1957 January, Eden resigned and his place taken by Harold. By the 1957 spring, the crises had come into alt. Both pipes from Iraq were reopened, and Canal also resumed for the tankers to use the route. The Canal then belonged and implemented by Egyptians, with Nasser taking the win. The predicament showed the culmination of Britain as one among the chief world powers. Also, both the World Wars and home division had exhausted Britain's confidence, capitals and even the political will.