President Trump was not the first U.S. President challenged with warfare on a waterway in the forever-difficult Middle East. In 1956, President Dwight Eisenhower confronted the Suez Canal crisis. How he responded—whether wisely or adversely—is still debated.
The Suez Canal is an official sea-level passage (it has no locks) extending 120 miles across the Sinai Desert, between Port Said and the Port of Suez. Completed in 1869, the canal shortened trade routes between Europe and Asia while becoming indispensable to international commerce. By mid-century 40 ships per day were sailing across, transporting 100 million tons of cargo.
An Egyptian canal company together with France constructed the Suez Canal. When financial problems forced Egypt to sell her shares to Britain, she and France assumed control of the Canal’s finances and operations. They retained control for 87 years.
Meanwhile radical politics overwhelmed Egypt. The overthrow of King Farouk in 1952 led to the rise of Gamal Abdul Nasser, a determined charismatic army officer who sought total authority of Egypt and the Arab World.
Nasser became angry at British diplomacy as well as U.S. refusal to participate in financing construction of Egypt’s Aswan High Dam. President Nasser announced July 29, 1956 Egypt’s nationalization of the Suez Canal. In October, British, French and Israeli forces invaded Egypt, and the Suez Crisis was joined.
As the Allies began overwhelming the Egyptians, Egypt closed the Canal by sinking ships in its smooth waters and barring all traffic from November 1956 until April 1957.
President Eisenhower, according to his biographer, Paul Johnson, had shown little interest in Nasser’s High Dam or in “...the Middle East and it’s frantic Arab politicians.” While withdrawing support for Nasser’s dam, he demanded Britain to do the same.
With the war raging in Egypt, the Allies sought America’s assistance. Eisenhower came down harshly against their invasion. He saw it as an act of aggression, one he viewed “with a mixture of moral outrage and contempt.” He threatened withdrawal of economic support and demanded the Allies’ immediate withdrawal from Egyptian territory. The disappointed Allies complied.
The outcome was certain. Egypt regained control of the Suez Canal and retains it to the present day. Nasser gained in power and prestige. On the other hand, America’s influence in global affairs became more dominant.
Those approving Eisenhower’s position say it avoided an escalation in the Cold War with Russia, that it enforced stability in the Middle East and that it prevented a much larger conflict.
Critics say the President caused an unfortunate decline of Britain and France in world affairs. In the long run it promoted instability in a region that did not need it and it strengthened Arab nationalism (no friend of the West) and it set a precedent for abandoning important allies.
Eisenhower, himself, made but one admission. In October 1965, in a speech before Jewish fundraisers and Republican supporters, he stated he greatly regretted forcing Israel during the Suez Crisis to withdraw from the Sinai Peninsula. No mention was made of Britain and France— America’s great allies in peace and war.
Sources: “Empires Battle Over Strait of Hormuz,” Wall Street Journal, Mr. 28, pC3; Eisenhower, Paul Johnson, 2014, Viking Press, N.Y. New York, 2014; Wikipedia, “Suez Crisis.”
Retired attorney Jim Thomas lives in Atlanta. Email jmtlawyerspeak@ yahoo. com
