Kryzhko L.A., Kryzhko E.V., Pashkovsky P.I.
Egyptian Policy in the Context of the Transformation of US Geostrategic Approaches in the Middle East in 1953–1956.
// Conflict Studies / nota bene.
2022. ¹ 3.
P. 33-41.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0617.2022.3.38207 EDN: OCBSPV URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=38207
Egyptian Policy in the Context of the Transformation of US Geostrategic Approaches in the Middle East in 1953–1956.
Kryzhko Lidiya Anatol'evna
PhD in History
Senior Lecturer, Department of Archeology and General History, V. I. Vernadsky Crimean Federal University
295007, Russia, Republic of Crimea, Simferopol, Academician Vernadsky Ave., 4
Kryzhko Lidiya Anatol'evna.
(2023)
The Suez Crisis in the US Foreign Policy Strategy in the Middle East: Risks and Prospects.. Êîíôëèêòîëîãèÿ / nota bene
1
.
DOI: 10.7256/2454-0617.2023.1.39816
DOI:
10.7256/2454-0617.2022.3.38207
EDN:
OCBSPV
Received:
04-06-2022
Published:
07-10-2022
Abstract: The authors consider the problem of the significance of Egypt's policy in the context of the transformation of the US geostrategic approaches in the Middle East in 1953–1956. It is shown that the approaches of the United States that have undergone transformation, which sought to create a controlled military-political bloc of the states of the Middle East region, were not implemented largely due to the policy of Egypt. Continuing the implementation of the military-political project - the Baghdad Pact, Washington not only did not achieve the favor of Cairo, but also caused its extremely negative reaction, which became a derivative of the understanding that American initiatives were an attempt to strengthen Egypt's traditional rival in the struggle for leadership in the Arab world – Iraq. A special contribution of the authors to the study of the topic is the designation of the role of Egypt as a regional power capable of creating alternative military projects to American initiatives. The circumstances preventing the inclusion of Cairo in the military-political bloc of states in the Middle East initiated by the United States, which directed a number of Arab countries against such initiatives, sympathizing with the anti-colonial sentiments of the Egyptian leadership, are indicated. It was revealed that the persistence of the initiatives of the Western states and the methods of their implementation prompted Cairo to seek protection in the face of an alternative center of power. Therefore, in the conditions of aggravation of Egyptian-Israeli relations on the eve of the Suez crisis, Egypt is drawing closer to the USSR. However, Washington retained the possibility of rapprochement with Cairo, not formally becoming a member of the Baghdad Pact, and also «staying aside» in the military anti-Egyptian action of Great Britain, France and Israel.
Keywords:
Egypt, USA, Middle East, Baghdad Pact, League of Arab States, Great Britain, USSR, Iraq, Gamal Abdel Nasser, Dwight Eisenhower
This article is automatically translated.
Thirdly, the persistence of the initiatives of the Western states and the methods of their implementation prompted Cairo to seek protection in the face of an alternative center of power. Subsequently, in the context of the aggravation of Egyptian-Israeli relations on the eve of the Suez crisis, Egypt's rapprochement with the USSR takes place. At the same time, Washington retained the possibility of rapprochement with Cairo, formally not becoming a member of the Baghdad Pact, as well as "remaining on the sidelines" during the military anti-Egyptian action of Great Britain, France and Israel in October 1956.
References
1. Primakov, E. M. (1978). Anatomy of the Middle East Conflict. Moscow: "Thought". 2. Mjavlikh, M. S. (1997). Some Historical and Legal Aspects of the Activities of the League of Arab States in the International Arena. Middle East: History and Modernity. Digest of Articles. Moscow, 90–103. 3. Rudenko, L. N., Solovieva, Z. A. (2007). League of Arab States and Integration Processes in the Arab World. Moscow: IOS RAS; MEI. 4. Doran, M. (1999). Pan-Arabism Before Nasser. Egyptian Power Politics and the Palestine Question. New York: Oxford University Press. 5. Hutchison, E. (1956). Violent Truce. A Military Observer Looks at the Arab-Israeli Conflict 1951–1955. London: Calder. 6. Kryzhko, L.A., Kryzhko, E.V., Pashkovsky, P.I. (2022). Egypt in U.S. Policy in the Middle East in the Early 1950s. Conflict Studies. Nota Bene, 2, 40–50. DOI: 10.7256/2454-0617.2022.2.38065. 7. Statement of Policy by the National Security Council. Washington, July 23, 1954. (1954). Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, The Near and Middle East, IX(1). Retrieved from https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v09p1/d219 8. Kryzhko, L. A. (2017). The Transformation of Egypt's Foreign Policy in the Early 1950s and the Problem of Egyptian-Israeli Relations. International Relations, 1, 155–163. 9. Pact of Mutual Co-operation (with exchange of letters). Signed at Baghdad, on 24 February 1955. (1956). Treaties and international agreements registered or filed and recorded with the Secretariat of the United Nations, 233, 199–217. Retrieved from https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%20233/v233.pdf 10. Telegram From the Embassy in Iraq to the Department of State. Baghdad, March 2, 1955. (1955). Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, Near East Region; Iran; Iraq, XII. Retrieved from https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1955-57v12/d420#fn:1.5.4.10.8.16.12.8 11. Heikal, M. H. (1986). Cutting The Lion’s Tail: Suez through Egyptian eyes. London: Deutsch. 12. Efremov, A. (1958). The Crisis of the US Middle East Policy. Modern East, 10, 9–11. 13. Eden, A. (1960). Full Circle. The Memoirs. London: Published by Cassell. 14. Nagaichuk, V. I. (1982). US Policy Towards Egypt (50-60s). Kyiv: Science thought. 15. Recording of the Conversation Between the USSR Ambassador to Egypt D. S. Solod and Egyptian Prime Minister H. Nasser. 07.08.1954. (2003). In. V. V. Naumkin (Ed.), Middle East Conflict: From Documents of the Foreign Policy Archive of the Russian Federation. 1947–1967, 1: 1947–1956 (pp. 214–216). Moscow: MFD. 16. Isaev, L. M. (2011). The League of Arab States: the history of creation. Oriens, 3, 87–94. 17. Rumyantsev, V. P. (2008). The Ideology of Pan-Arabism and the Middle East Policy of the USA and Great Britain in the 1950s. The Arab world and neighboring countries: history and modernity. Interuniversity collection. Tomsk: Tomsk University Press, 41–55. 18. Etzioni, À. (2001). Political Unification Revisited: On Building Supranational Communities. Lanham: Lexington Books. 19. Primakov, E. M. (2016). Confidentially: The Middle East on Stage and Behind the Scenes. Moscow: Center-polygraph. 20. Recording of the conversation of the USSR envoy to Syria S. S. Nemchiny with the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Syria H. al-Azem. 03.23.1955. (2003). In. V. V. Naumkin (Ed.), Middle East Conflict: From Documents of the Foreign Policy Archive of the Russian Federation. 1947–1967, 1: 1947–1956 (pp. 261–264). Moscow: MFD. 21. Epstein, A. D. (2003). Wars and Diplomacy. Arab-Israeli Conflict in the Twentieth Century. Kyiv: SPIRIT I LITERA. 22. Egorin, A. Z. (1992). Nasser – Khrushchev: friendship-duel. Asia and Africa today, 7, 12–17. 23. Egorin, A. Z., Abdel Hamid, H. A. (1998). War for the Middle East Peace. Moscow: Eastern Literature. 24. Yurchenko, S. V. (2000). USA and International Crises in the Bipolar World (1940–1960s). Sevastopol: Fleet of Ukraine. 25. Kryzhko, L. A. (2017). Egyptian-Israeli Border Clashes in the First Half of the 1950s. Historical, Philosophical, Political and Legal Sciences, Cultural Studies and Art History. Questions of Theory and Practice, 10(84), 1, 97–100. 26. Kissinger, G. (1997). Diplomacy. Moscow: Ladomir. 27. From a Letter from the USSR Embassy in Egypt to Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR V. A. Zorin. 01.22.1955. (2003). In. V. V. Naumkin (Ed.), Middle East Conflict: From Documents of the Foreign Policy Archive of the Russian Federation. 1947–1967, 1: 1947–1956 (pp. 247–248). Moscow: MFD. 28. Sachar, H. M. (1981). Egypt and Israel. New York: Richard Marek Publishers
Peer Review
Peer reviewers' evaluations remain confidential and are not disclosed to the public. Only external reviews, authorized for publication by the article's author(s), are made public. Typically, these final reviews are conducted after the manuscript's revision. Adhering to our double-blind review policy, the reviewer's identity is kept confidential. The list of publisher reviewers can be found here.
The subject of the research in the peer-reviewed article was the contradictory relations between the official authorities of Egypt and the United States aimed at creating a regional security system in the Middle East on the eve of the Suez crisis. This topic will remain relevant for a long time until the main contradictions in the region under study are resolved. Unfortunately, the author did not bother to describe and argue his own methodological choice, which clearly does not apply to the merits of the work. Nevertheless, when reading the article, it is possible to explicate the methodological basis on which the peer-reviewed study was based. As can be understood from the context, the author used a historical method that allowed to study the relationship between Egypt and the United States in their contradictory development, as well as an institutional one, which was aimed at analyzing formal and informal agreements between the countries in question. The lack of methodological reflection is slightly compensated by a fairly detailed factual account illustrating the course of the processes under study, as well as the conclusions drawn on the basis of the analysis. For this reason, it is possible to find results in the article that are not devoid of some signs of scientific novelty. In particular, the author managed to show and explain the shift of interest of the Egyptian official authorities (in search of a center of power guaranteeing stability in the region, on the eve of the Suez crisis) from the United States to the Soviet Union, which, in turn, complicated the implementation of the military-political project in the form of the Baghdad Pact for the United States. However, the presentation of these results in the text leaves much to be desired. So, there is no heading in the article. The following sections can be conditionally distinguished in the text: "introduction", in which there is a brief description of the problem, argumentation of the topic choice, mention of the main scientific works on this topic, as well as the purpose of the study; "the main part", devoted to the analysis of the contradictory efforts of the Egyptian and US authorities to form a military-political bloc, which they ended in failure – the creation of the Baghdad Pact, which caused "indignation on the part of some Arab States, especially Egypt and Saudi Arabia" – and, as a result, intensified Cairo's efforts to create a counterweight to the Baghdad Pact and search for an alternative center of power in the region; "conclusion", which summarizes the results of the study. The heading of the article is not a mandatory requirement and cannot serve as a reason for refusing to publish the work. However, the heading can be considered as an urgent recommendation. Therefore, the author can be recommended to finalize the text, dividing it into logically related sections, each of which should be provided with an appropriate title. This will greatly facilitate the perception of the text. The style of the article can be fully characterized as scientific: the text is written in good language, with the correct use of scientific terminology and practically without grammatical errors. The bibliography includes 28 titles, including documents in foreign languages, and sufficiently represents the state of research on the topic of the article. An appeal to opponents takes place when justifying the choice of a research topic: the author rightly points out that the role of Egypt has been underestimated in the literature on this topic. GENERAL CONCLUSION: despite some shortcomings, the article submitted for review can be qualified as a scientific work that meets the basic requirements for works of this kind. The presented material corresponds to the subject of the journal "Conflictology / nota bene" and will arouse the interest of political scientists, sociologists, conflictologists, specialists in the field of international relations, as well as students of the listed specialties. The article can be recommended for publication after the elimination of the comments made.
© 1998 – 2024 Nota Bene. Publishing Technologies. NB-Media Ltd.
