58.6.4 Suez Crisis 1956 and the Second Arab–Israeli War

OCR Specification focus:
‘The Suez Crisis (1956): Second Arab–Israeli War and Israeli territorial expansion.’

The Suez Crisis of 1956, also known as the Second Arab–Israeli War, was a pivotal Cold War-era conflict that reshaped Middle Eastern politics, imperial power, and Arab–Israeli dynamics.

Background to the Suez Crisis

End of Empire and Nationalism

By the mid-20th century, European imperial powers like Britain and France faced rising nationalist movements. Egypt, under President Gamal Abdel Nasser, symbolised this anti-colonial wave. Nasser’s ambitions extended beyond Egypt’s independence: he aimed to lead Pan-Arabism and reduce Western influence in the Middle East.

Strategic Importance of the Suez Canal

The Suez Canal, opened in 1869, connected the Mediterranean Sea to the Red Sea, shortening routes between Europe and Asia. It became a vital artery for oil shipments from the Middle East to Europe and was jointly managed by British and French interests.

Suez Canal: A man-made waterway in Egypt linking the Mediterranean and Red Seas, crucial for global trade and military strategy.

Britain maintained a strong military presence in the Suez Canal Zone until 1954, reflecting the canal’s strategic importance. Egypt’s control over this waterway was both a symbol and a tool of sovereignty.

Causes of the Suez Crisis

Nationalisation of the Suez Canal

In July 1956, Nasser nationalised the Suez Canal Company, previously controlled by British and French shareholders, to fund Egypt’s Aswan High Dam project after the United States and Britain withdrew financial support.

President Nasser in Cairo after declaring the nationalisation of the Suez Canal in July 1956. The photograph illustrates the mass popular support that strengthened his political hand during the crisis. Source

This act was celebrated in the Arab world as defiance against imperialism.
Britain and France, however, saw it as a threat to their economic interests and global influence.

Geopolitical Tensions

The crisis unfolded amid Cold War rivalries:

The United States opposed European colonialism but sought to limit Soviet influence in the region.
The Soviet Union supported Nasser rhetorically, aligning with anti-imperialist movements.

Israel also had its own motives. Egyptian support for fedayeen raids from Gaza and the blockade of the Straits of Tiran threatened Israeli security and trade.

The Tripartite Collusion: Britain, France, and Israel

The Sevres Protocol

In October 1956, Britain, France, and Israel secretly met in Sèvres, France, to coordinate a military response. Their plan:

Israel would invade the Sinai Peninsula and advance toward the canal.
Britain and France would then issue an ultimatum to both sides to withdraw from the canal zone.
When Egypt refused, they would intervene militarily under the guise of peacekeeping.

This collusion aimed to remove Nasser, regain control of the canal, and secure Israeli borders.

Course of the Second Arab–Israeli War

Israeli Invasion of Sinai

On 29 October 1956, Israeli forces launched Operation Kadesh, a rapid assault on Egyptian positions in the Sinai Peninsula. Israeli paratroopers captured strategic points, including the Mitla Pass, showcasing Israel’s growing military capability.

Egypt’s army was overwhelmed, though Nasser called for Arab solidarity and resistance.

Anglo-French Intervention

On 31 October, Britain and France issued their ultimatum. When Egypt refused, they began aerial bombardment of Egyptian targets and landed troops near Port Said on 5 November.

Royal Navy image showing HMS BUTTRESS disembarking troops and vehicles during the landings at Port Said, 5–6 November 1956. This visual anchors the narrative of Operation Musketeer, when Britain and France intervened following Israel’s Sinai offensive. Source

The canal was quickly seized, but the military success was overshadowed by political backlash.
Nasser sank ships to block the canal, crippling trade.

International Reaction and Pressure

US and Soviet Responses

The Suez intervention sparked global outrage. Both superpowers, despite their rivalry, opposed the invasion:

President Dwight D. Eisenhower threatened economic sanctions against Britain, including selling US reserves of sterling, forcing a British withdrawal.
The Soviet Union condemned the invasion and threatened rocket attacks on London and Paris, escalating Cold War tensions.

The crisis revealed Britain and France’s declining imperial power and their dependence on US support within the Western alliance.

United Nations Intervention

The United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) was deployed to supervise the withdrawal of foreign troops. By December 1956, Britain and France had withdrawn, followed by Israel in March 1957, under US pressure.

United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF): A peacekeeping force established by the UN in 1956 to oversee the cessation of hostilities during the Suez Crisis.

Consequences and Impacts

Political and Strategic Outcomes

The Suez Crisis marked the end of Britain and France’s dominance in the Middle East:

Britain’s global status was irreparably weakened, and Prime Minister Anthony Eden resigned in January 1957.
France redirected its focus towards European integration and colonial conflicts in Algeria.

For the United States, the crisis was an opportunity to expand influence. The Eisenhower Doctrine (1957) promised US support to Middle Eastern countries resisting communism, deepening American involvement in the region.

Rise of Nasser and Arab Nationalism

Nasser emerged as a hero of Arab nationalism, despite Egypt’s military defeat. His defiance enhanced his prestige across the Arab world and strengthened Pan-Arabist movements.

The crisis inspired anti-colonial struggles and accelerated decolonisation in Africa and Asia. Egypt maintained control of the Suez Canal, which reopened in April 1957 under Egyptian authority.

Israeli Gains and Limitations

Israel achieved significant military objectives:

Secured access to the Straits of Tiran, ensuring freedom of navigation to Eilat.
Temporarily reduced cross-border raids from Gaza.

However, Israel’s territorial gains in Sinai were reversed under international pressure, highlighting the limits of its expansionist ambitions.

Significance for the Arab–Israeli Conflict

The Second Arab–Israeli War deepened hostility between Israel and its Arab neighbours. It highlighted the strategic importance of the Middle East in the Cold War and demonstrated how regional conflicts could draw in global powers.

The crisis also illustrated the transformation of the Middle East’s political order: imperial control waned, superpower rivalry intensified, and new regional actors, led by figures like Nasser, shaped the future of the Arab world and the Arab–Israeli conflict.

FAQ

The Sevres Protocol was significant because it revealed the extent of secret coordination between Britain, France, and Israel, showing how far they were willing to bypass the United Nations and international law to achieve their aims.

It also deepened Arab mistrust of Western powers, portraying the conflict as part of a wider imperialist agenda. The exposure of the protocol damaged the reputations of Britain and France, weakening their diplomatic standing and hastening their decline as global powers.

The Suez Crisis marked the first large-scale deployment of a UN peacekeeping force — the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF). Its success in supervising the withdrawal of foreign troops established a model for future peacekeeping missions.

It showed that the UN could intervene without permanent members’ troops, maintaining neutrality.
It paved the way for peacekeeping roles in later conflicts, including Cyprus (1964) and the Congo Crisis (1960).
It enhanced the UN’s legitimacy in mediating Cold War-era disputes, especially in regions of superpower rivalry.

The United States prioritised global stability and containment of Soviet influence over preserving British and French imperial interests. Washington feared that the invasion would drive newly independent Arab states towards the Soviet Union, undermining Western influence in the Middle East.

Eisenhower also wanted to demonstrate that the United States opposed colonialism, reinforcing its position as a supporter of national self-determination. This stance helped improve American relations with Arab nations and positioned the US as the main Western power in the region after 1956.

The Suez Crisis was one of the first major conflicts to be widely covered on television, with graphic images of civilian casualties and bombings broadcast internationally.

British public opinion turned against the war as images contradicted official justifications.
International outrage grew, increasing pressure on Britain and France to withdraw.
The intense media scrutiny highlighted the shift in post-war politics, where public opinion became a powerful force in shaping foreign policy decisions.

Nasser’s defiance and survival enhanced his status as a pan-Arab leader, inspiring nationalist movements across the Middle East and North Africa.

In Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, groups sought to replicate Egypt’s anti-imperialist stance.
It weakened pro-Western monarchies and increased pressure for reform and independence across the Arab world.
The crisis also deepened resentment against Israel, framing it as part of Western imperial ambitions, which fuelled Arab unity against Zionism and Western intervention.

Practice Questions

Question 1 (2 marks):
What was the main reason for President Nasser’s nationalisation of the Suez Canal in 1956?

Mark scheme:

1 mark for identifying that Nasser nationalised the canal to fund the Aswan High Dam project after Western powers withdrew financial support.
1 mark for mentioning that nationalisation also symbolised Egyptian sovereignty and resistance to British and French imperial influence.

Question 2 (6 marks):
Explain two consequences of the Suez Crisis of 1956 for Britain and France.