Skip to content

Results:

21 - 30 of 143

Documents

December 3, 1956

Middle East (Situation): Debated in the Commons Chamber, Monday, 3 December 1956

In July 1956, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser (1918-1970) nationalized the Suez Canal Company, surprising the world. The government of France, in whose capital of Paris the company was headquartered, and the British government, the company’s plurality shareholder, sought to reverse nationalization in court, but failed—even though they clad their case in the language not of imperial self-interest but, rather, of international public interest. The time in which such language was somewhat acceptable, even at home, was passing, and the Suez Crisis played a big part in this final act.

At the same time, the two governments early on after the canal nationalization decided to remove Nasser by force, for re-compensation was not their central concern. France believed Nasser was enabling the FLN, which in 1954 had started Algeria’s War for Independence, and Britain wanted some say in the canal, which had for decades been its worldwide empire’s “swing-door,” as a member of parliament, Anthony Eden (1897-1977), called it in 1929. In August 1956 France began discussing a joint operation with Israel, which wanted Nasser gone, too, and the Red Sea opened for Israel-bound ships. In early October the two were joined by Britain. On the 29th, Israel invaded the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula. On the 30th, France and Britain gave Israel and Egypt a 12-hour ultimatum to cease hostilities, or they would intervene—and Anglo-French forces bombed Egyptian forces from the 31st and on November 5-6 occupied the canal’s northern tip. Although a power play, “Operation Musketeer,” like the court case, could not be an open imperial move anymore, then, and did not present itself to the world as such. No matter: especially in colonies and postcolonial countries, people were outraged.

More problematically for France and Britain, Washington was incredulous. This Middle Eastern affair triggered the worst crisis of the 1950s between America’s rising international empire and Europe’s descending empires, and indeed clarified and accelerated that descent. President Dwight Eisenhower (1890-1969) fumed that Prime Ministers Anthony Eden and Guy Mollet (1905-1977) had disregarded his administration’s opposition to military action. Worse, they had deceived him about their intentions. And worst, their attack on Egypt undermined the supreme US tenet: Soviet containment. The Americans were by association tainted by their NATO allies’ imperialist move while the Soviets looked good—on November 5 they offered Egypt troops and threatened to nuke London, Paris, and Tel Aviv—and that although they had just repressed an uprising in Hungary.

On the very day of the ultimatum, October 30, Eisenhower washed his hands of that move on live US television, and the US mission at the UN organized a cease-fire resolution vote in the Security Council. France and Britain vetoed it. Although sharing its European allies’ emotions about Nasser, the US administration withheld critical oil and monetary supplies from them to bring them to heel and withdraw from Egypt—after which, it promised, they would be warmly welcomed back. It ceased most bilateral communications and froze almost all everyday social interactions with its two allies, even cancelling a scheduled visit by Eden. And it badgered its allies at the UN, supporting an Afro-Asian resolution that on November 24 called Israel, Britain, and France to withdraw forthwith. On December 3, the British Foreign Secretary Selwyn Lloyd took the floor in the House of Commons.

June 29, 2020

Interview and Discussion with Sir Malcolm Rifkind

Discussion with Sir Malcolm Rifkind, former Defense Secretary and Foreign Secretary of the United Kingdom, about the 1990s and the new relationship that formed after the Cold War.

October 15, 1955

Gazette of the State Council of the People's Republic of China, 1955, No. 17 (Overall Issue No. 20)

This issue begins with reports about granting awards for military service as well as about economic development and the national plan in 1954. It also covers the then-ongoing Sino-American ambassadorial talks, features a report about Chinese mineral reserves, and includes instructions for the storage of autumn grain.

September 23, 1944

Stalin’s Conversation with Ambassadors Harriman and Kerr

Ambassadors Harriman and Kerr discuss Stalin's surprise about the Warsaw Uprising, the Russian's engaging with the Japanese after Germany's defeat, and the next Big Three Meeting.

August 9, 1944

Stalin's Promise to Mikolajczyk

Stalin's conversation with Mikolajczyk and the results of Stalin's promise to give aid to help Polish fighters in Warsaw.

August 3, 1944

Conversation between Stanislaw Mikolajczyk and Stalin

The Prime Minister of the Polish Government in Exile meets with Stalin to discuss Polish-Soviet political and military relations.

June 10, 1944

Conversation about The Far East

Harriman and Stalin discuss the Soviets entering the Pacific Theater after Germany's defeat and the use of Far East bases.

June 10, 1944

Stalin and Harriman Discuss the Military Situation

Ambassador Harriman and Stalin discuss D-Day and future Russian offensives including Finland.

June 10, 1944

Stalin and Harriman discuss Far East Air Power

Ambassador Harriman and Stalin discuss using Far East air bases for American troops and American's training Soviet pilots.

June 5, 1944

Djilas’s Conversations at Stalin’s Dacha

Milovan Djilas meets Stalin at his Dacha to discuss current affairs.

Pagination