The Suez Canal, opened in 1869, was known as the “jugular vein of the British Empire” as it provided the shortest ocean link between the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean, eased commerce for trading nations, and helped European colonial powers to govern their colonies. The economic potential of the Middle East, with its vast oil reserves, as well as the Suez Canal’s geopolitical importance, prompted British imperialism to establish its position throughout the region, including a vast garrison of 80 000 along the length of the canal in an area known as the Canal Zone, but this presence generated intense hostility.
The post-imperial actions of Western powers within the volatile Middle East still lie at the roots of many issues in the region
…show more content…
The Soviets believed that Arab nationalism would weaken Western interests in the region and thus made a series of gestures from dropping earlier territorial demands on Turkey, aid and visits to Afghanistan, and settling a frontier dispute with Iran, to sending large Soviet delegations to the congresses of Orientalists to support Middle Eastern nationalism. Reports in the Egyptian press highlighted Soviets’ support, threatening Western interests.
Problems at home
The domestic problems in Britain were another factor that led to Britain’s declining influence in the region after the Suez Crisis, however it could be argued that these problems were already in existence before Suez. These problems were both economic and political.
Economic
…show more content…
Firstly, the damaged relationship between Britain and America meant that America no longer supported British interests in the region. Furthermore, America was propelled to take a more active role in the region as a consequence of the USSR’s growing influence, which necessarily displaced Britain’s control.
Although both Britain and America aimed to overthrow Nasser, Britain’s decision to intervene at Suez poisoned Anglo-American relationships. Both sides felt betrayed. America felt betrayed because Britain secretly concluded the Sèvres protocol with France and Israel and carried on with military intervention. Britain felt equally betrayed by USA’s lack of support. For example, America pressured Britain into a ceasefire by causing their Federal Reserve bank to offload sterling at a discount, which could have had a grave economic impact on Britain if continued. The opposition against British involvement and the risk of endangering the Commonwealth and Anglo-American relations was instrumental in coercing Eden to accept the
How does one region have a prolonged battle for authority, and conflict with the opposing force for eternity? After the Ottoman Empire sided the Central Powers during World War I, they didn’t foresee that they would lose their empire based off of this decision. European countries that won the war came in and partitioned the Middle Eastern region. Soon after the Sykes-Picot Agreement was established, and the Arabs felt betrayed because they weren't granted their deserved independence. The new borders set caused continuous conflict because of the artificial blending of different ethnic and religious groups. International conflicts have contributed to regional conflict in Southwest Asia by forming borders without regards to the different ethnic and religious groups, creation of the state Israel in 1948, and the U.S. being involved in the matters of the Middle
The Middle East has historically rebuked Western influence during their process of establishing independence. When Britain and France left the Middle East after World War II, the region saw an unprecedented opportunity to establish independent and self-sufficient states free from the Western influence they had felt for hundreds of years. In an attempt to promote nationalistic independence, the states of the region immediately formed the League of Arab States in 1945. The League recognized and promoted the autonomy of its members and collaborated in regional opposition against the West until 1948 when Israel declared independence. Israel represented then and now an intrusive Western presence in the Arab world. The ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict typifies this cultural antagonism. The Cold War refocused attention to the Middle East as a site of economic and strategic importance for both sides, yet the two hegemons of the Cold War now needed to recognize the sovereignty of the Middle Eastern states. With their statehood and power cemented, the Middle Easte...
The alliance formed between the US and USSR during the second world war was not strong enough to overcome the decades of uneasiness which existed between the two ideologically polar opposite countries. With their German enemy defeated, the two emerging nuclear superpowers no longer had any common ground on which to base a political, economical, or any other type of relationship. Tensions ran high as the USSR sought to expand Soviet influence throughout Europe while the US and other Western European nations made their opposition to such actions well known. The Eastern countries already under Soviet rule yearned for their independence, while the Western countries were willing to go to great lengths to limit Soviet expansion. "Containment of 'world revolution' became the watchword of American foreign policy throughout the 1950s a...
How did imperialism manage to bring both disaster and success to Egypt? The morals of imperialism are mixed; it all depends on perspective. It brought along famines, heavy taxes, and many others to Egypt. On the other hand, it opened up trade routes from Britain to Asia and India, formed a steady supply of cotton for Britain, etc. (period6-5imperialism10.wikispaces.com, Egypt) In the beginning, Egypt actually tried to modernize itself, as an attempt to ward off European dominance (Modern World History, 354), but debts and other financial problems drove it into Britain’s arms. So how was Egypt affected by this? As a result of imperialism, Egypt received aid on some of the current problems, but were faced with many more new ones.
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.
"Suez Canal Crisis." CBCnews. CBC/Radio Canada, n.d. Web. 7 Jan. 2014. . (tags: none | edit tags)
Throughout the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century, almost every country in Africa was imperialized by other countries in Europe. To imperialize is to conquer another country, whether it be in the means of politics, economics and/or culture, and control that land. The aftermath for the imperialized country was either beneficial or harmful. The amount of African countries that a European country imperialized varied. Great Britain imperialized fifteen countries in Africa, including Egypt in 1882, Sierra Leone in 1808, and the Union of South Africa in 1910. Although Great Britain’s reasons to imperialize were selfish, Britain helped each country progress afterwards.
When the Age of Imperialism began in 1875, it effected Africa in many ways. Nowhere was the competition for colonies more intense than in Africa. Europeans went after North and South Africa splitting up the continent. Egypt and Sudan were taken over by Britain to obtain the Suez Canal. Imperialism helped to develop Africa’s economy and turned it into a continent of colonies.
British Imperialism in China and Africa The treatment of the Chinese by the British, during the takeover of their country, was just like that of the Africans. The British took over the land and the government, took advantage of the people and exploited them for their resources. The English accomplished these things differently in each situation, but each time, the results were the same. One of the most important aspects of imperialism is the takeover of government.
Introduction: The epoch of imperialism cannot be defined simply as a proliferation of inflated egos tied to the hardened opinions of nationalists, but also a multi-faceted global rivalry with roots of philosophies tainted with racism and social Darwinism. The technique of each imperialist was specific to the motivations and desires of each combative, predominantly Western power and subsequently impacted the success of each imperialist and its colonies. Driven by industrialization, Europeans are aware of the urgent need for raw materials and new markets to maintain a constant rate of expansion and wealth. Imperialism became a competition; in general, the European countries led with fervor while the non-Western regions deemed likely to be stepped on.
There is a point of time in certain a country’s history where they become dominant and more powerful than ever before. During this elongated process a country becomes an empire. The British and the Ottomans were states that succeeded in this process, but becoming an empire such as theirs required vast amounts of political and social maneuvering to expand their boundaries, called imperialism. Imperialism is, “a policy of extending a country's power and influence through diplomacy or military force”. By becoming a modern nation enjoying economic prosperity and political stability, the British and the Ottomans created an imperialistic impact over the globe with distinctive motivations and approaches especially during the transition period of gaining ample amount power and influence globally.
"All the leadership had spent their early years in England. They were influenced by British thought, British ideas, that is why our leaders were always telling the British "How can you do these things? They're against your own basic values.". We had no hatred, in fact it was the other way round - it was their values that made us revolt." -Aruna Asaf Ali, a leader of the Indian National Congress. (Masani, quoted in Wood, 32, 1989)
Motives for British Imperialism in Africa Before the Europeans began the New Imperialism in Africa, very little was known about the inner parts of the continent. However, after some explorers delved deeper into the heart of Africa, the Europeans soon realized how economically important this area was, and how much they could profit from it. At the time, Britain had only small occupations of land in Africa, but after they realized that they could make money from the rich resources from the inner regions of Africa, they wanted to invade the African countries and take over. This led to the scramble and ultimately, the partition of Africa. During the Age of Imperialism, from 1870-1914, Britain was a major country, which proved to be true in the “carving up” and division of Africa.
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.
Gerner, Deborah J., and Philip A. Schrodt. "Middle Eastern Politics." Understanding the contemporary Middle East. 3rd ed. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2008. 85 -136. Print.