Lester Pearson's Role In Ending The Suez Canal Crisis

Imagine four of the most powerful countries at war for a very long time, fighting over the survival instinct to obtain natural resources. Soldiers were dead, some were wounded, and others were tired of fighting. Families were losing loved ones, and the war won’t end, creating a downfall in economy, resources, armies, energy and ending in a gloomy and depressive atmosphere worldwide. What would make England, France, Israel fight Egypt for? The one and only paramount location which is the Suez Canal. The Suez Canal is a shipping route that connects the Mediterranean Sea and the Red sea, that allows ships and cargo to pass, reducing the distance, time and effort. In 1869, the Suez Canal was officially up and running, and because of this great
importance, the Suez Canal grabbed interest worldwide. Dilemmas started in 1875, when Egypt sold its shared for the Suez Canal ownership to England due to overdue debt. Although this happened, the canal was open for all ships worldwide. Conflicts had risen and ever since, war was at stake over the control of the canal, and its resources (Briney).
Consequently, making it an area that grabbed the attention, and was a major cause of long lasting invasions from France, England and Israel. Many countries gave a passive reaction towards the Suez Canal crisis, without any initiations of a peace treaty or even a settlement between the four countries.
The war reached a dead end, and the only country that aided the peace treaty was Canada, through a prominent figure named Lester Pearson.
He, who was a Prime Minister for the Canadian government from 1963 to 1968 (Hillmer 3) did not reach this post easily. His name was known for his tremendous effort in peacemaking especially in solving the Suez Canal crisis. Lester Pearson was the person who initiated ending the Suez Canal crisis, by contributing to a peace conference and settlement between the four countries, asked for a ceasefire and supervised it, and received a Nobel Prize for ending the war and creating peace
again.
The World feared the Suez Canal crisis, it created many dilemmas, alienated the commonwealth, degraded the UN authorities, destroyed the western alliance unity and threatened great damage to the Middle East as a whole by war (Lester P.). Lester Pearson was the only person who saw these threats on the long term, and had a vision that if the war continued, great damages will occur, and the biggest of them all is an economic threat. According to Andrew Cohen, author of Lester B. Pearson, the United States created an initiation in the Security Council to persuade the English and French to cease fire and stop the ongoing war (Cohen 116). Although this was thought to be a successful initiative, Pearson felt that it needed an extra step to complete it. He believed that for this peace treaty to be successful, it has to benefit all sides, and create a settlement to allow all sides to withdraw without any losses, creating a win – win situation. In order for this win - win situation to occur, Pearson refrained from voting in the Security Council on the American resolution to cease fire. He felt that this was not enough to control the mess that already occurred in the Middle East. According to John Melady, Pearson feared that “there was nothing to prevent the belligerents from taking a respite for a few days, or even months, then, as soon as their arms and determination had been adequately replenished, renewing hostilities.” (Melady 126). Pearson used his experience, social intelligence, persuasion skills and connections to persuade all parties to withdraw. He did this by having great knowledge of what each party actually needs and read between the lines. England and France needed to withdraw but without compromising their power in the region, meaning that they did not want to be seen as defeated or withdrawn countries. Pearson knew that they went through traumatic losses, an economic catastrophe and a desperate need to end this ongoing war. Therefore, Pearson offered a complete and comprehensive peace conference and a settlement, which brought him positive feedback, and consents to move ahead with it without wasting time.
Pearson believed that in order not to waste time, he needed to act quickly and profusely.
What helped him to move even more quickly is Henry Lodge’s indication that “he authorized the secretary general to create an emergency international force to supervise a cease fire”(Cohen p119). Lodge authorized Pearson to be responsible for this gesture, as he knew how much he could depend on him and how Pearson could act fast without obstacles (Cohen 120).In order to improve the supervision, Pearson voluntarily provided a thousand Canadian soldiers to help in the peace by being a barrier between Arabs and Israelis while the settlement is in the making. Also, due to his social intelligence, he made sure that these soldiers were not form the queens own (those who flew the Red Ensign) because he knew they would be rejected by the Egyptians (Cohen 121) fearing they would not trust them, which could have caused more problems. As promised, Pearson successfully helped in making peace again within a short period of time. On November 7th a cease fire was declared, November 15th UN soldiers arrived, and Israelis withdrew and finally the Suez Canal
reopened.
With all the success Pearson introduced in his lifetime, winning a Nobel Prize was never something on his mind. He was a selfless man, who only worked for the good of his country and had a vision to keep his ancestor countries and the world at peace. Pearson had won the Nobel Prize in 1957 for being a lifelong peacekeeping personnel who became the first Canadian to have won this honorable prize. The Canadians perceived him as a person who is never to be replaced, as he came up with the long term vision of Canada being a peaceful country like it is now. Dag Hammarskjold, a Swedish diplomat nominated Pearson for the Nobel award, and it was known that he had a “high regard for Pearson” (Stursberg 164). He was not only recognized by Canadians, but also worldwide, in the Middle East, Europe and America as an international intermediary.
To conclude, Lester Pearson was a Canadian peace maker, who was the main reason behind ending the Suez Canal crisis in Egypt. He not only initiated a settlement for all the countries for a win win solution, but he also supervised this treaty, for the good of them all. He made sure that each country withdrew from war, while at the same time ensuring that there aren’t any losses. Pearson was against war, and wanted to implement a peace strategy worldwide, especially among the Canadian allies. For his initiation and determination to end this war, Pearson received a Nobel Prize on 1957, only a year after ending the Suez Canal crisis, to show appreciation for his hard work.