What effect did the Suez canal crisis in 1956 have with Britain's relationship with the Empire?

Question

Please accurate information!

Answer 1

You can read here some of the answers:
The Suez Crisis[2] ( Arabic: أزمة السويس - العدوان الثلاثي Hebrew: מבצע קדש) was a war fought on Egyptian territory in 1956. The conflict pitted Egypt against Israel, the United Kingdom and the Fourth French Republic.

The Suez Canal had been important in the British and French colonial penetration of Africa, and had been vital in maintaining control of India. For this reason it was considered important by them to keep the canal out of Egyptian control. Thus in 1875, Isma'il Pasha was forced to sell his country's share in the canal to the United Kingdom, and the Convention of Constantinople (1888) declared the canal a neutral zone under British 'protection'.

The Anglo-Egyptian Treaty of 1936 gave the United Kingdom control over the canal. However, in 1951 Egypt repudiated this treaty, and by 1954 the United Kingdom had agreed to pull out.

Britain objected strongly when the Egyptian leader, Gamal Abdel Nasser, nationalized the Suez Canal Company, which operated the Suez Canal. By this stage, two-thirds of Europe's oil was being imported via the canal. Britain purported to fear an Israeli attack on Egypt, and sought cooperation with the United States throughout 1956 to deal with this, to little effect.

The alliance between the United Kingdom, France, and Israel was largely one of convenience; the European nations had economic and trading interests in the Suez Canal, while Israel wanted to reopen the canal for Israeli shipping and end Egyptian-supported fedayeen incursions and hit-and-run raids.

When the Soviet Union threatened to intervene on behalf of Egypt, Canadian Secretary of State for External Affairs Lester B. Pearson feared a larger war and proposed a plan to separate the opposing forces by placing United Nations forces between them to act as a buffer zone or 'human shield'. (Pearson later won a Nobel Peace Prize for his role in ending the conflict).

Eventually, pressure from the United States forced Britain, France, and Israel to withdraw. The crisis resulted in the resignation of the British Conservative prime minister, Sir Anthony Eden, marked the completion of the shift in the global balance of power from European powers to the United States and the USSR, and was a milestone in the decline of the British Empire. (Vikpedia)

more here
http://www.historyguy.com/suez_war_1956.html

The British Prime Minister of the time, Sir Anthony Eden, tried to persuade the British public of the need for war and so, perhaps in an attempt to recall World War II-era patriotism, he compared Nasser's nationalisation of the Suez Canal with the nationalism of Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler twenty years earlier. However, it is interesting to note that the very first comparisons between 1930s dictators and Nasser during the crisis was made by the opposition Labour leader, Hugh Gaitskell and the left-leaning tabloid newspaper, the Daily Mirror. Eden had been a staunch opponent of Neville Chamberlain's policy of appeasement and he claimed that a display of force was needed to prevent Nasser becoming another expansionist military threat. Eden had also been exercised over Nasser's apparent role in the dismissal of British military leader Glubb Pasha in Jordan prior to the canal company nationalization. The French also were hostile because of Nasser's support for insurgents in Algeria.
more you will find here:
http://www.answers.com/topic/suez-canal-crisis

Answer 2

To many, it appeared that the British government had entered into an international conspiracy with France and the US. When Nasser blocked the Suez Canal, he also used his new status as leader of the Arab Nations, to cut back on oil production and exports to Western Europe. Anthony Eden had to resign and the French government under Mollet collapsed. The British had lost a lot of respect and support in the Middle East.

Answer 3

Not a major one, but the suez canal crisis highlighted that Britain was no longer a world power, and had to bow to USA authority, and since the USA was anti-imperalist, they were against Brutains empire therfore any chance of maintaining empire was gone. And any chance of Britain playing a significant world role rested in forming close ties with USA.

Answer 4

none that i recall