The Other Side of the Suez -- How close to Iraq now?

[rpannier]

ABC (Asia-Pacific Broadcasting) just finished showing a documentary on the Suez Canal Crisis. It was interesting to watch and see how much it resembles today in Iraq. (note: The documentary makes no attempt to link the two. I am.)

First: You have the three allies Britain, France and the United States. In the case of the Suez it's Britain and France on one side and the United States opposed to military action. The French foreign minister referred to the US as being "poor allies" and questioned the US resolve and courage in the face of evil.

Second: The British lied to the US and the world by claiming the Nasser was aligning himself with the Soviets, would allow the Soviets to use Egyptian soil for Soviet military bases and that Egypt was a threat to regional stability.

Third: The British badly miscalculated the resolve of the indigenous people. This was not viewed as a liberation by the Egyptians, as the British hoped. But, rather as an attempt by Britain to re-colonize the region.

Fourth: The casualties caused by the "liberators" were astoundingly high as civilians bore the brunt of British armor.

Fifth: Opposition to the War at home (Britain) caused serious unrest for PM Edens conservative government, ultimately forcing him from power.

Sixth: Eden's invasion caused serious damage to Britain's economy by depleting the financial reserves.

A few notes:

1. The Soviet crackdown on Eastern Europe (esp Hungary) was partially caused by the British Blunder. In documents dating from the 50's, Khrushchev saw the British and French invasion of Egypt as being the product of a perception that Khrushchev was weak.

2. Eisenhower was so angry that when Britain came to the US for money, Eisenhower made it clear that they would not get a dime until they were gone from Egypt. Eisenhower also decided that the British and French could not be trusted in the region, so he decided that the US needed to have a greater presence in the region.