Assess the Short Term Significance of the Suez War of 1956

Assess the short term import of the Suez contend of 1956 The Suez contend had profound short term signifi nethersidece in many aspects. It can be argued to be one of the first wars in the Arab-Israeli conflict which involved substantial foreign involvement. Although Britain and France were humiliated and lost their wreak in the pump tocopherol, it in high spiritslighted the rising importance of Cold War government activity in the warmheartedness vitamin E. Egypt and Israel can be considered as winners of the Suez War Egypt assembleed make love control of the Suez render and Israel had access to the Straits of Tiran.However, both countries were to re main(prenominal) antipathetical and the legacy of the Suez War will be conflict, not peace. First of all, the Suez War in 1956 played a significant role in Nassers Egypt. T present were many gains for Egypt from the Suez War. American Historian, William Polk verbalizes in western eyes, the Suez War make Nasser a hero and c laimed a political victory within a array defeat, this rumourmonger shitly infers to the unsuccessful attempt of Britain and France to set aside Nasser which made him became a symbol of anti-colonial movement.This statement is rein soldiersd by the spoken language of Nasser, where he wrote that the Suez War regained the wealth of the Egyptian people and it was clear for the Egyptian people that they could defend their country and secure its license, while this comment is partly accurate, as Egypt did manage to gain complete control of the Suez Canal and obtained a large quantity of British military stores, the source here is clearly biased because Nasser had deliberately failed to describe Egypts casualties from the war. He had through with(p) this to promote his bit as not only the Egyptian leader, tho a leader which all the Arab nations looked up to. notwithstanding their success, Egypt had suffered the highest casualty with total finale up to 1600, while Israel, Britain and Frances death were well below a hundred. Additionally, Egypt had failed to control the Gaza Strip and Photograph A shows despite control of the Suez Canal, Egypt was inefficient to use the canal efficiently to fund the country for instance, by put in toll fees. The Suez War critically damaged Egypts relations with America. In response to Americas cancellation of a promised grant of 46 million dollars towards building the Aswan dam, American aid was replaced by Russian aid.However, one should ever so be mindful that Nasser did not want Egypt to be tied to the Soviet spousal relationship as he wanted Egypt to be neutral. Conversely, in American eyes, Egypt became part of the Cold War as any country which was not part of Western alliance and which bought arms from tocopherolern Europe was plainly as bad as the USSR. The Suez War 1956 was of great significance for Israel. We can reinforce Avi Shlaims interpretation on the Sinai campaign to help yieldle the impact on Israel . Despite an Israeli, Avi Shlaim gives a neutral point on the impacts to Israel.The origin of the Sinai campaign was initially planned by Ben Gurion and its leaders untold(prenominal) as Moshe Dayan. Its 3 Operational Objectives were to defeat the Egyptian Army, to establish up Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping and to put an end to Fedayeen attacks crossways Israels southern border. Moshe Dayan, in his memoirs, the Story of My Life, was confident that the three main objectives were achieved by the end of the Suez War. The Israeli army won a clear military victory which proved the Israeli Defense Forces the strongest in the Middle East this was upgrade beef up by Moshe Dayan as Nasser learned the honor the power of Israels army. Although Shlaims view that damage to Egypt was slight and quickly repaired due to timely withdrawal from Sinai, Historian Normal Lowe argues that the inflicted heavy losings on Egypt in men and equipment would take years to make hefty. Furtherto a greater extent, Israel managed to gain access to the Straits of Tiran, allowing them to trade with Asia and Africa. The end to Fedayeen attacks proved grand success, the Sinai Peninsula became effectively demilitarized guarded by UN troops which would allow Israel to enjoy xi years of security and stability along the border with Egypt.As well as the Three Operational Objectives from the Sinai Campaign, it consisted of three political aims to overthrow Nasser, expand Israeli borders and establishment of a new political order in the Middle East. Unlike the successes from their operational objectives, they failed to achieve the political aims. In the first political aim, Israel paid a heavy political price for ganging up with Britain and France against the sudden forces of Arab nationalism. In the second political aim involving Israels borders, Israel was forced to run out all the territory it had conquered.The third aim however, written by Shlaim tends to deviate Moshe Dayans v iew that the victory in Sinai meant that Israel emerged as a state that would be welcomed as a friend and ally. While this may not be directed at Arab nations, it may wee-wee been implied in cost of relations with foreign powers. Although Ben Gurion failed to topple Nasser and achieve his political aims, the Suez War had allowed Gurion to force Sharetts resignation which initially gave him the option of launching a war against Egypt. Moreover, Shlaim contends that Israel and Ben Gurion learned two important slightons from its experience in the Suez War.Firstly, Israel must aver on nuclear deterrence to protect its borders rather than expanding it. Secondly, Israel was to depend on the US in future(a) decision making and must commode and directly consult with the US before engaging in future wars this is evident in the Suez War, where Israel was pressured by US withholding aid and bump from the United Nations to withdraw from Sinai. The impact of Suez War led to a high tide o f Arab Nationalism in the Middle East. When Nasser regained control of the Suez Canal he destroyed the statue of De Le Sepps a clear message of Egypts discourtesy for western imperialism.Arabs reduced oil supplies to Western Europe showing they find become more anti-western. Syria and Saudi Arabia also broke off relations with Britain and France. In 1957, a Treaty of Arab Solidarity was signed by Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Despite the mistrust remaining surrounded by the Arab states, this treaty highlighted the Arab nations all had a coupled aim to overthrow Israel and gage the Palestinians. This is supported by Ian J. Bickerton and Carla L. Klausner as they demonstrate how Suez war only deepened the Arab desire for revenge.Furthermore, William Cobban argues that the legacy of the Suez Crisis will be war not peace, and that Nasser would rally the Arab nations to a full exceed war against the Israelis. This view of Arab Nations continual avenging attitude towards I srael is reinforced by Andrew Goldsmith, as he argues that the yield of the Suez War resembled a singultus rather than a true turning point in the bill of Egypt and Israels internal politics. It was one of many conflicts in which Arab countries and Israel ca-ca failed to solve any existing tensions.Another short term significance of the Suez War was that it greatly damaged leading European colonial powers particularly Britain. Keith Kyle argues that Suez affirm to the world that Britain was no longer a superpower, as Britains failure to overthrow Nasser and secure the Suez Canal had cost them world degradation. With a clear indication of Britains end of imperialism, it led to a further decline of British and French influence around the world such as in Africa and South-East Asia. The Suez War encouraged rebels in Algeria, where the Algerians gained their independence from France in 1962.Britains failure had cost them to lose foreign ally the Israelis now looking towards the the States as their main supporter. Britains fall influence in the Middle East is further supported by Normal Lowe, where Britains ally in Iraq, premier Nuri-es Said came under increasing attack from other Arabs for his pro-British attitude. Britains damage from the Suez War and so led to financial trouble where its international reserve was seriously depleted. Because of the impedimenta of canal and the disruption of pipeline caused by the Suez War, gas rationing was introduced in Britain.This meant Britain had no choice but to become more obedient and less reluctant to oppose any US policy for its financial support . While Mordechai Bar-On, the Bureau Chief- General of Moshe Dayan states in hindsight that from the view of Britain and France, the Suez war was a major mistake. From Israels point of view, it was perhaps lucky that they made the mistake, because it was to this mistake, Israel became more ready for the next round in 1967. France on the other hand went its knowledge wa y, opposed to Britains decision to side with the US.Led by de Gaulle, it left(p) NATO and turned to leading Europe alongside a newly comfy Germany. The Suez War had a profound impact on the Cold War. hot seat Eisenhower explained that as a result of Suez, The Middle East, which had always been coveted by Russia, today be prized more than ever by international socialism, this outcome was perhaps made by President Eisenhower himself as timothy Naftali, author of Khrushchevs Cold War explains that Nikita Khrushchev was subject to get apart with nuclear bluff, showing weakness of the US that the Soviet Union exploited.As Egypt turns towards the Soviet Union for aid, Eisenhower was to become even more determined in containing communism. He set up the Eisenhower Doctrine which offers economic aid and military protection to Arab states that agree to reject communism. He even stated, Since we are roughly to get thrown out of the Middle East, we might as well confide in Arab nationali sm, showing Eisenhowers awareness that the Middle East was to become the arena of the Cold War.However, his comment cannot be fully relied on as it was perhaps an excuse for America to enter the Middle East with dual objectives, as in Canadas point of view, supported by William Cobban, Eisenhowers beginning to commit US troops to the Middle East what he said he would never do was to replace Britain with its own brand of imperialism. In conclusion, despite major losses inflicted on Egypt, Nasser was able to turn the defeat into a political victory in which Nasserism influence, where a blend of Pan-Arabism, positive neutralism and Arab socialism was to extent throughout the Arab nations.The results of the war have also proved Israels strength and determination in securing its position in the Middle East. Britain and France was to be humiliated and the Suez War accelerated decolonisation and had caused them to lose influence in the Middle East. Relations between the USSR and USA hav e evidently resulted in a freeze rather than a thaw. However, the Suez War was just one of many events that had failed to resolve peace between Israel and Egypt. Andrew Goldsmith argues that the internal politics of the Middle East were affected much less significantly than its external politics by the events of 1956. , Israels gain from the opening of Straits of Tiran and its peaceful border with Egypt were all reversed in 1967. Nasser still refused to recognize Israel. The contradiction is made by Moshe Dayan where he confirms that the result of Suez War stated Reactionary and aggressive nature of Israel, and because it made Nasser the defined leader of the Arab World. Word count -1986 Appendix Photograph A obtained from http//www. theegyptianchronicles. com/ term/1956Jubilation. html Bibliography Secondary 1. Michael Scott-Baumann , Crisis in the Middle East Israel and the Arab States 1945-2007, 2009 2.Normal Lowe, Mastering upstart World tale,2005 3. Avi Shlaim, The Iron cir cumvent Israel and the Arab World 4. Kirsten E. Shulze, The Arab-Israeli Conflict,1999 5. Andrew Goldsmith, http//www. hillel. upenn. edu/kedma/05/goldsmith. pdf 6. Paul Reynolds, http//news. bbc. co. uk/2/hi/middle_east/5199392. stm, 7. http//israelipalestinian. procon. org/view. answers. php? questionID=000472 Contemporary 1. Michael Scott-Baumann, Conflict In the Middle East Israel and the Arabs, 2007 2. http//millercenter. org/president/speeches/ exposit/3360 3. http//www. spartacus. schoolnet. co. uk/COLDsuez. tm 4. http//www. historylearningsite. co. uk/suez_crisis_1956. htm 5. William Cobban, Mission Suez. The Canadian puzzle 6. National Geographic Suez Crisis 7. The Egyptian Chronicles 1956, Photograph in Appendix http//www. theegyptianchronicles. com/Article/1956Jubilation. html , 8. Council on exotic relations, http//www. cfr. org/content/meetings/hungary_suez-summary. pdf &8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212&8212 1 . Conflict in the Middl e East Israel and the Arabs rascal 23. By Michael Scott-Baumann 2 . http//www. theegyptianchronicles. com/Article/1956Jubilation. html 3 .The Iron Wall Israel and the Arab World page 143-185 by Avi Shlaim 4 . Mission Suez. The Canadian Experience by William Cobban 5 . http//israelipalestinian. procon. org/view. answers. php? questionID=000472 6 . http//www. hillel. upenn. edu/kedma/05/goldsmith. pdf 7 . Modern World History page 238-289 8 . National Geographic Suez Crisis 9 . http//news. bbc. co. uk/2/hi/middle_east/5199392. stm- Paul Reynolds 10 . http//millercenter. org/president/speeches/detail/3360 11 . http//www. cfr. org/content/meetings/hungary_suez-summary. pdf 12 . Mission Suez. The Canadian Experience by William Cobban