The Suez Crisis, a pivotal moment in the mid-20th century, had far-reaching implications for international relations, Cold War dynamics, and the balance of power in the Middle East. Understanding how the Suez Crisis concluded requires a look at the complex interplay of diplomatic, political, and military factors that ultimately brought the conflict to an end. Let's dive into the details and explore the resolution of this significant event.

The International Pressure

One of the primary reasons the Suez Crisis concluded was the overwhelming international pressure exerted on the involved parties. The United States and the Soviet Union, despite their Cold War rivalry, found themselves in rare agreement. Both superpowers condemned the Anglo-French-Israeli intervention. President Dwight D. Eisenhower, in particular, was furious with Britain and France for not consulting the U.S. before launching the military operation. Eisenhower feared that the intervention would push Arab nations closer to the Soviet Union, thereby increasing Soviet influence in the Middle East.

The U.S. applied significant economic pressure on Britain, threatening to sell off U.S. holdings of the British pound, which would have crippled the British economy. This financial pressure, combined with strong diplomatic condemnation, forced Britain to reconsider its position. France, too, faced similar diplomatic isolation and economic concerns. The Soviet Union, under Nikita Khrushchev, threatened military intervention on behalf of Egypt, further escalating the pressure on the invading forces. The combined weight of these pressures made it clear to Britain, France, and Israel that they could not sustain their military operation in the face of such widespread opposition.

The United Nations also played a crucial role in resolving the crisis. The UN General Assembly passed Resolution 997, calling for an immediate ceasefire and the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Egyptian territory. This resolution, backed by the U.S. and the Soviet Union, added further legitimacy to the international demand for an end to the conflict. The UN's involvement provided a framework for negotiations and peacekeeping efforts that ultimately facilitated the withdrawal of troops and the de-escalation of tensions. The creation of the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) was particularly significant. UNEF peacekeepers were deployed to the Sinai Peninsula to maintain order and prevent further hostilities between Egypt and Israel. This marked the first large-scale peacekeeping operation by the UN and set a precedent for future interventions in international conflicts.

Ceasefire and Withdrawal

The ceasefire was a critical step in concluding the Suez Crisis. Under immense pressure from the United States, the Soviet Union, and the United Nations, Britain and France agreed to a ceasefire on November 6, 1956. Israel, facing similar pressure, also agreed to halt its military operations. The ceasefire was not immediate, and there were still some skirmishes and tensions on the ground, but it marked a significant turning point in the crisis.

The withdrawal of foreign forces from Egyptian territory was a complex and sensitive process. Britain and France initially resisted withdrawing their troops, seeking guarantees that Egypt would not close the Suez Canal again and that Israeli shipping would be allowed to pass through the canal. However, the U.S. and the UN insisted on unconditional withdrawal, arguing that Egypt's sovereignty must be respected. Eventually, Britain and France relented and began withdrawing their forces in December 1956. Israel was more reluctant to withdraw, as it had gained significant strategic advantages during the conflict, including control of the Straits of Tiran, which allowed Israeli ships access to the Red Sea. However, under continued pressure from the U.S. and the UN, Israel completed its withdrawal in March 1957.

The deployment of UNEF peacekeepers to the Sinai Peninsula was crucial in ensuring the withdrawal was carried out peacefully and that tensions between Egypt and Israel did not escalate. The UNEF served as a buffer force between the two countries, monitoring the ceasefire and preventing incursions. The presence of UN peacekeepers helped to stabilize the region and create an environment conducive to negotiations and long-term peace.

Diplomatic Negotiations

Diplomatic negotiations played a crucial role in formalizing the end of the Suez Crisis and addressing the underlying issues that had led to the conflict. Following the ceasefire and the withdrawal of foreign forces, various diplomatic efforts were undertaken to resolve the outstanding issues and prevent future conflicts.

The question of the Suez Canal's control and operation was a central focus of these negotiations. Egypt, under President Gamal Abdel Nasser, reaffirmed its sovereignty over the canal but also committed to ensuring freedom of navigation for all nations, in accordance with international law. The Suez Canal Authority was reorganized to ensure efficient and non-discriminatory operation of the canal. International observers were stationed at the canal to monitor its operation and ensure compliance with international agreements. These measures helped to restore confidence in the canal as a vital waterway for global trade.

The issue of Israeli shipping rights through the Suez Canal and the Straits of Tiran was another contentious issue. Egypt continued to deny Israeli ships access to the Suez Canal, but the international community insisted on freedom of navigation through the Straits of Tiran. The presence of UNEF peacekeepers in the Sinai Peninsula helped to ensure that the Straits of Tiran remained open to Israeli shipping. This arrangement, however, remained a source of tension between Egypt and Israel and would eventually contribute to the outbreak of the Six-Day War in 1967.

Long-Term Consequences

The conclusion of the Suez Crisis had long-term consequences for all the parties involved and for the broader international landscape. For Britain and France, the crisis marked the end of their era as major global powers. The failure of their military intervention exposed their declining influence and their dependence on the United States. The crisis also accelerated the decolonization process, as many countries in the developing world saw the Suez Crisis as a symbol of the waning power of the old colonial powers.

For Egypt, the Suez Crisis was a major victory. President Gamal Abdel Nasser emerged as a hero in the Arab world, and Egypt's control over the Suez Canal was firmly established. The crisis also strengthened Nasser's position as a leader of the non-aligned movement, which advocated for neutrality in the Cold War. However, the crisis also left Egypt with significant economic challenges and unresolved tensions with Israel.

For Israel, the Suez Crisis had mixed results. Israel achieved some of its military objectives, such as opening the Straits of Tiran and disrupting fedayeen attacks from the Sinai Peninsula. However, the crisis also exposed Israel's dependence on foreign powers and its vulnerability to international pressure. The unresolved issues of Israeli shipping rights and the status of the Palestinian refugees remained sources of conflict and instability in the region.

The Suez Crisis also had a significant impact on the Cold War. The crisis demonstrated the growing influence of the Soviet Union in the Middle East and the willingness of the U.S. to oppose its traditional allies in certain circumstances. The crisis also highlighted the importance of the United Nations as a forum for resolving international conflicts and maintaining peace. The creation of UNEF set a precedent for future UN peacekeeping operations and demonstrated the potential of the UN to play a constructive role in resolving international disputes.

In conclusion, the Suez Crisis concluded due to a combination of international pressure, diplomatic negotiations, and the deployment of UN peacekeeping forces. The crisis had far-reaching consequences for the parties involved and for the broader international landscape, marking a turning point in the mid-20th century.