Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The significance of the suez crisis 3 page history essay
The significance of the suez crisis 3 page history essay
The significance of the suez crisis 3 page history essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The Suez Crisis of 1956
Introduction
Among the most important foundations in the continuing Arab-Israeli
conflict was the seeds that were sown in the aftermath of the 1956 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 1967 "Six Day War". The positive impact that the United Nations would
have on ending the conflict, through Canada's idea of creating a UN peacekeeping
force to help enforce the ceasefire, was another important outcome.
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: the Israeli and the Arab points of view, plus the experiences of
the European powers as well. 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, 1956 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
in 1956 , and 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...
... middle of paper ...
...tter idea of how the Egyptian army forces
viewed and dealt with the crisis.
To help in a general rounding of the Israeli view of the crisis, I used Yitzak Shamir's
autobiography (Shamir, Yitzhak; "Summing Up"; London; Weidenfeld and Nicolson
Press; 1994.), a man who was to play an integral role in the Arab-Israeli
conflict as the Prime Minister of Israel in the 1980s.
My search for an Israeli military perspective was quite arduous, but finally settled on the work of Chaim Herzog in "The Arab-Israeli Wars" (1982). As Herzog was a major-general in the crisis of 1956, he not only provided me with detailed information of the
invasion itself, but of the various meanings and causes behind it.
In trying to find Jewish academic sources, I eventually settled on the works of Itamar Rabinovich's "Seven Wars and One Peace Treaty" (1991), and M.E. Yapp's "The Near East Since the First World War" (1991). While Rabinovich was based in Tel Aviv and had
stronger pro-Israeli views, Yapp, who was a professor in London, England, who's
ideas were a little more moderate and yet, at least in this author's perspective,
seemed to lean quite distinctly towards the Jewish State's cause.
Dawidowicz, Lucy S.. The war against the Jews, 1933-1945. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1975.
In the Middle East, by July 1956, tensions were rising. The Egyptians were denied funds from the Us, Britain and the World Bank for the creation of their Aswan dam to affiliation with the Soviet Union. In desperate need of funds for the dam project, the Egyptian government had nationalize the Suez Canal Company, froze its assets in Egypt, and proposed to use canal tolls to pay for the dam (Hillmer, 1999, p. 226). In fear of the Egyptians cutting off the transportation of Arabian oil and Asian goods, the British, French, and Israel secretly planned an attack on Egypt. Meanwhile, the Israelis and the Arab states, including Egypt, were having an arms race. Israel was concerned with self-preservation while the Arabs, who had opposed Israel's creation, wanted to destroy it. The Americans opposed the British, French, and Israeli invasion of Egypt because it didn't want to offend the Arab states where US oil companies were drilling. On the other hand, the US was wiling to supply Israel with weapons if the Soviet Union sent arms to the Egyptians. Such military support could inevitably have lead to a nuclear war. Through ties with Britain, Canada was expected to aid in the invasion pf Egypt but Canada was reluctant and saw how much actions might put their relationship with the Americans in danger.
War and Peace in the Middle East by Avi Shlaim. In the novel War and Peace In the Middle East, author Avi Shlaim argues that Arab nations have been unable to escape the post-Ottoman syndrome. In particular, he describes how the various powers inside and outside the region have failed to produce peace. While some of Shlaim's arguments hinder the message, I agree with his overall thesis that the Middle East problems were caused and prolonged by the failure of both powers and superpowers to take into account the regional interests of the local states.
...d took control of the Gaza Strip once again. Anwar el-Sadat then became president after Gamal Abdel Nasser died in 1970. In an effort to take control of the Sinai Peninsula, Anwar el-Sadat attacked the Israelis. After a cease-fire, the United Nation’s troops then returned to keep things peaceful. Israel then later withdrew and was only allowed to use it for non-military purposes. In 1978 a peace treaty was established between Egypt and Israel which influenced more peace in the Middle East. Although a formal treaty was signed in 1979. In 1981 Sadat was assassinated and Mohamed Hosni Mubarak followed him in presidency. The Sinai Peninsula was then returned to Egypt in 1982 after the Israeli troops withdrew from the region. Mubarak embraced Sadat’s policies and managed to climb to the top and be once again making Egypt known as one of the leaders of the Arab world.
More easily understood Foucault is presenting forth the idea of hegemony, or the thought that power structures exist because everyone buys into them. For example, women’s dress in business situations. For the most part, women are expected to dress in nigh uncomfortable clothes in the work place: skirts, heels, makeup (to a degree). Women accept this, men accept this, and everyone in society accepts this as a norm. Because it is seen as “normal” rather than something forced upon women by a group, other women will police their peers: sharp looks, snide comments, etc. This norm is policed by those who are trapped by it and they never think about why it is they are required to dress as they
93). Therefore it falls on the community to validate what is and isn’t knowledge, which results in what is and isn’t power. Thus power creates and is administered by what is accepted by society through learned discourses of truth (Foucault, Pg. 93). Foucault holds that the truth is always relative to an order of power, and that discourses of truth are a tool to attain power (Foucault, Pg. 93). Thus everyone is involved in and plays a role in the creation of power as discourses spread and produce, reinforce, and challenge power. Foucault articulates that the effects of truth that power constructs and transmits, in turn results in the proliferation of power (Foucault, Pg. 93). He argues that power cannot be attained except through the truth (Foucault, Pg. 93), thus in order to function we must speak the truth (Foucault, Pg. 93). Foucault is trying to argue that it is in fact not class status, nor economic or political power that drives power, but rather it is the truth that makes laws and thus produces true discourses that decide and extend the effects of power (Foucault, Pg. 94). Therefore, true discourses are the bearers and the invigilators of the specific effects and realms of power (Foucault, Pg.
Bourke, Dale Hanson. The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Tough Questions, Direct Answers. Downers Grove, IL: Inter Varsity, 2013. N. pag. Print.
First of all, imperialism was not something the Egyptians wanted. They witnessed the decline of the Ottoman Empire, and that acted as a wakeup call. They can either keep up with the modernization of the world around them, or be overwhelmed and lost among it (Modern World History, 354). They decided to make new reforms as an attempt towards modernization. One of these attempts was the Suez Canal. It was a waterway that connected the Nile River, Mediterranean Sea, and the Red Sea. The labor costed over 100 million dollars, and it opened in 1869 (Rosenberg). The Suez Canal, along with other reforms, put Egypt in a rough economic state. The British wanted control over the canal because it was the main route to India and its other colonies. Because of the huge debt, Egypt was forced to hand the canal over to Britain. Later, in 1882, Britain gained control to Egypt itself (Modern World History, 355). Thus, Egypt was under new rule and became one of Britain’s many colonies. To sum up, Egypt created many reforms ...
Andersen, Roy, Robert F. Seibert, and Jon G. Wagner. Politics and change in the Middle East: sources of conflict and accommodation. 9th ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1982. Print.
The War of 1948, also known as the War of Independence, was fought between Israel and its Arab neighbors. The war began May 15, 1948 when units from the armies of Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq invaded Israel launching a war that lasted until December 1948.# The war resulted in the defeat of the Arab forces and the success of Israel as a newly established state. It is evident that the Arab forces were not successful in the first Arab-Israeli war because the Arab army lacked motivation, education, and proper equipment.# Despite the support from Arab states outside of Palestine, the Arabs were unable to gain enough strength to overcome the Israeli forces. In contrast, the Israeli army was able to succeed because they had unconditional support from the Jewish community, efficient infrastructures, and modern equipment. Israel also used significant strategies that proved lethal against the competing Arab forces. With the Arab communities unorganized attempt to go to war in 1948, it was inevitable that Israel would come out of the war as the victor.
Michel Foucault may be regarded as the most influential twentieth-century philosopher on the history of systems of thought. His theories focus on the relationship between power and knowledge, and how such may be used as a form of social control through institutions in society. In “Truth and Juridical Forms,” Foucault addresses the development of the nineteenth-century penal regime, which completely transformed the operation of the traditional penal justice system. In doing so, Foucault famously compares contemporary society to a prison- “prison is not so unlike what happens every day.” Ultimately, Foucault attempts to exemplify the way in which disciplinary power has become exercised in everyday institutions according to normalization under the authority network of individuals such that all relationships may be considered power relations. Thus, all aspects of society follow the model of a prison based on domination. While all aspects of society take the shape of prison, most individuals may remainignorant of such- perhaps just as they are supposed to. As a result, members of society unconsciously participate in the disciplinary power that aims to “normalize,” thus contributing to and perpetuating the contemporary form of social control. Accordingly, the modern penal regime may be regarded as the most effective system of societal discipline. [OK – SOLID INTRO]
Shehata, S. (2011, November 25). Profiles of Egypt's Political Parties. BBC News. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15899548
At this point we can determine the purpose of Foucault’s question, “what is critique”? Foucault’s definition of critique provides a tool to find cracks in power-knowledge relationships by analyzing the genealogy of a power knowledge relationship. Foucault states “we have to deal with something whose stability, deep rootedness and foundation is never such that we cannot in one way or another envisage, if not its disappearance, then at least identifying by what and from what its disappearance is possible” (65). Foucault believes that using his method of critique a power and knowledge relationship is not permanent. Questioning and knowledge can be used to remove the leash from authority.
Littman, Robert and Pasachoff, Naomi E, Concise History of the Jewish People, Rowman & Littlefield, 2005
Egypt developed a railway from Cairo to Alexandria as well as ports along the Mediterranean coast because of its dependence upon the European market. The structure of Egyptian politics and state administration was also redefined during Ali’s rule. As the government centralized, it required individuals specialized in Western forms of education to fill its roles of leadership.... ... middle of paper ... ...