Canada's Role In The Suez Crisis Of 1956

In 1945 when the UN was officially founded, Canada argues to be made a middle power, meaning they would get recognition for being capable of holding their own, and the contribution they made during World War II. Canada is very well known for their participation in every UN peacekeeping operation. Lester B. Pearson even won a Nobel Peace Prize in 1957. When Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal, Britain, France and Israel made a secret pact to invade Egypt. Israel attacked Egypt while Britain and France took over the Canal. The situation grew tense when many countries denounced the invasion. Lester B. Pearson proposed to the UN that Britain, France and Israel withdraw their troops and the UN send a peacekeeping army into Egypt. His proposal was accepted. Canada also adapted a new flag, which in a way was to show they had completely detached themselves from Britain. In 1949 Canada had signed the NATO treaty. That was the first time Canada had signed a military

Not many people recognize what the Suez Crisis is, but to those who do, they all know that Lester B. Pearson played a crucial role in the neutralization of the situation. In 1956 3 , Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal, thus triggering a crisis. Britain and France soon joined in a coalition along with Israel, in order to topple the Egyptian government. The invasion was halted due to pressure from the U.N. Lester B. Pearson understood that France, Britain and Israel could not all hold onto the Suez Canal without consequences, most thought of a war of some sort. He also understood that the war would cause NATO and the Commonwealth to crack under the pressure. Knowing this, Lester B. Pearson convinced the U.N. peacekeeping force in an impressive 57-0 4 fashion, thus diffusing the Suez Crisis altogether. For his contributions, he was awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace. This is a defining moment in Canadian history and is often regarded as the start to Canada’s humble and nice keeping persona and it all started because of this man.

Putting the nation in a complete defensive security arrangement with the united states of America, Britain and the nations of western Europe. During the Cold War, NATO forces made a frontline deterrence against the Soviet Union. The treaty was signed on April 4, 1949. It included 12 nations: Canada, United States, Iceland, Britain, France, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Portugal, and Italy. At the center of the treaty was a security provision of Article 5 “an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all. In 1966 France pulled out of NATO’s military structure, although France remained a member of the Nato alliance. The government of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau considered a similar withdraw for Canada. In 1969 an important review of the foreign policy, they decided to cut Canada's contribution drastically, ending Canada's nuclear strike role and diminish the army and air elements. After Canada’s commitment of arms and troops to the alliance persisted substantially lower than NATO countries wanted The Cold War later ended in the early 1990s. Canada's troops in Europe were brought home, NATO changed its ways from defense against the Soviet Union to fully pursue global peace and security. Peacekeeping is the term linked to United Nations (UN) military mediation operations. Because of Lester Pearson's authority in the 1956 Suez Emergency and Canada's part in the UN Crisis Power he made, Canadians have in some cases thought about peacekeeping part of the nation's personality. Nonetheless, since the 1990s Canada's notoriety for being a peacekeeping country has been muddled by outrage and by the disappointment of some abroad missions. After Suez, many Canadians came to regard peacekeeping as a national vocation and burden on Canada. This was very evident in July 1960

Lastly, declaring war twice was unethical, but Canada learned from their mistakes. In 1956, the Suez crisis started. The Suez Canal is located near Egypt and was used as a faster way to transport goods to European countries, especially oil. The Egyptian president seized control of the canal which scared countries like the United States, which used the canal as a vital part of transportation, therefore starting conflict . The Canadian Prime Minister, Lester B. Pearson, decided instead of going in to the conflict they would go to the canal as peace keepers .

All things considered because of the outrage in the General Assembly and anger in Washington it was not allowed. Instead Pearson abandons this idea and proposes a real UN force without British or French forces. Finally in early November, the General Assembly showed incredible support for his proposal to “secure and supervise the cessation of hostilities”. (Colyer, Cecillon, Draper, and Hoogeveen, 2010, p286). Within two weeks advance peace-keeping units arrive in Egypt.

Although Canada took part in this conflict, they wanted to create peace with enemies. This caused Canada to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). NATO’s main purpose is to create peace between countries, whether or not if they are the enemies or the allies. NATO safeguards the freedom and security of its associates through political and military means, hence why Canada joined this organization. Although they were part of NATO, they still supported United States by allowing the US to build military bases on Canada’s soil.

Canada had no interest to the Suez crisis, in terms of control, economic or military interest, but Lester B. Pearson saw an opportunity to intervene. While the Cabinet in Ottawa debated about the attack on Egypt, the UN Security Council met in New York. Even though Canada did not have a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council, Lester B. Pearson and the Foreign Affairs delegation of Canada worked towards building an agreement for the proposal to the UN, on the Suez Crisis. Encouraged by the US, Yugoslavia makes a “Uniting for Peace resolution”, which enables a debate to be moved to the General Assembly. The UK and France do not block this, however, negative votes would not constitute a veto. The Suez Canal

This won Pearson a well deserved Nobel Peace Prize in 1957, and Canada proceeded to participate in every UN peacekeeping mission set into motion from 1956, the preceding year, until 1980. Pertaining to both the prize and what he had set into motion, Pearson stated the following: “I am aware that in the work which I have done...I was the spokesman for Canada and

Canada needed to go to Afghanistan to maintain world peace for many reasons. First, Afghanistan needed assistance after becoming overwhelmed with terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda which had set up training camps in Afghanistan. Secondly, people around the world were starting to doubt the effectiveness of international organizations like NATO and the UN’s. If Canada didn’t assist in NATO and the UN’s efforts in Afghanistan, it would further damage the reputation of peacekeeping international organizations. Finally, Afghanistan was becoming a training ground for al-Qaeda and Canada had to help in the fight against terrorism by going to Afghanistan. To summarize, Canada needed to go to Afghanistan to help rebuild Afghanistan, help prove that

The Suez Crisis was an incident that first commenced on the 29th of October, 1956, in which Israeli military forces entered the Sinai Peninsular and attacked Egyptian positions, driving them back. By the next day, Israeli forces had reached the Suez Canal, after taking a majority of the Sinai Peninsular. (Best, Hanhimaki, Maiolo & Schulze, 2008, p.432). Britain and France then both issued an ultimatum, for both Israeli and Egyptian forces to withdraw from the Suez Canal, citing its safety from the violence of war as extremely important. After Gamal Abder Nasser, Egypt’s President at the time, rejected the ultimatum, on the 30th

The peacekeeping force consisted of military soldiers from 130 different countries in the United Nations. After the peacekeeping force idea, Pearson stated to the other countries that “peace is far more than ceasing to fire”. After hearing this from Pearson, 57 UN states voted in favour of the idea and no country voted against the peacekeeping mission. The peacekeeping mission was a plan to send the United Nations military to sign an agreement and stop the crisis without anyone having to admit defeat. Soon after the voting, UN peacekeepers went into the Canal Zone to figure out an agreement. Ultimately this action won Lester B. Pearson the Nobel Prize and also helped Canada emerge as a middle

Background: In the midst of the Cold War and the Arab-Israeli conflict, conflict arose over Gamal Abdel Nasser’s nationalization of the Suez Canal. This was of particular concern due to Nasser’s increased connection with the Soviet Union, through the Czech Arms agreement and the Aswan Dam. Following Nasser’s nationalization of the Suez Canal, Great Britain, France, and Israel invaded Egypt. In facing this crisis, the U.S. had to consider Cold War politics with the Soviet Union, relations with Arab and Israeli nations, and relations with the invading powers

In 1956, Gemal Abdul Nassir announced that he wanted the nationalization of the Suez Canal. This canal has been operated by Britain and France since the 18th century and due to this, tensions rose between Egypt, Britain and France. Israel regarded Gemal Abdul Nassir as a threat to its national security and due to this it was easy for Britain and France to convince Israel in the invasion of Egypt and the overthrowing of its president. Israel invaded Sinai Peninsula, Britain and France landed their troops later on the pretence of separating the fighting parties. This was the start of the Suez crisis. The USA condemned their actions and forced the three parties to withdraw and this made it possible

Autonomy is an essential value in Western medicine and in medical ethics, and encompasses the idea that patients are entitled have a moral claim to direct the course of their own medical care and to be given sufficient information in order to make medical decisions (1, 2). Autonomous decisions have been defined as those made “intentionally and with substantial understanding and freedom from controlling influences”. Considerations of respect for autonomy in the health care context tend to focus on situations in which decisions need to be made about health care interventions. The principle of respect for autonomy is often key to discussions about confidentiality, privacy and truth-telling, but is most strongly associated with the idea that patients should be allowed to make autonomous decisions about their health care (3, 4).

In the article “ The fuel subsidy crisis has woken Nigerians up”, by Tolun Orgunlesi was profoundly characterised by the alarming issue that the citizens from Nigeria are confronting with the withdraw of fuel price subsidy which subsequently has led fuel price to increase more than double, consequently, provoking the price of goods and commodities to rise dramatically. In addition, the author focused immensely in the sentiment of corruption and mismanagement that Nigerians are feeling with this awaken call which proclaims for every Nigerian to pay particular attention to the government entities and their fictitious promises. Furthermore, several rationale points were addressed by the author in respect to the negative impact of such