Given the situation in Hungary this might not be the best time for the Soviets to try deploying paratroops to Egypt...
Given the situation in Hungary this might not be the best time for the Soviets to try deploying paratroops to Egypt...
Given the situation in Hungary this might not be the best time for the Soviets to try deploying paratroops to Egypt...
Not perfect biut better than OTL.
The Baghdad Pact survives and prospers, the Iraqi monarchi isn`t toppled, the fucken 1957 defence white paper doesn`t shaft the British aircraft industry, British high tech weapons sell widely in the Mid East, CVA01 & 02 get built.
Have I forgotten anything?
The idea of Soviets intervening in Egypt is nonsense. Basically the entire leadership was opposed and there was no way to get troops there. Khrushchev only made the paratrooper and "volunteer" threat after it was clear that the crisis had resolved itself. Hungary was more important anyways. A Soviet humiliation over Suez due to Khrushchevite blundering could pave the way for him getting thrown out in '57.
Israel will not get the Sinai. That would be blatant land-grabbing that nobody would stand. They might get military control over Gaza and promises to demilitarize the Sinai, but that's it.
The UK and France aren't leaving until Nasser's out, and frankly they probably didn't need to march to Cairo to pull that off--Naguib, a handful of pashas, and even some of the Free Officers were playing vultures in the shadows.
The UK and the French stay in the CZ until the UN either deputizes them as a peacekeeping force (unlikely) or another one comes in (Canada?). Bear in mind that this is ultimately what the British and French wanted. The British had already pulled out of the CZ and are desperately trying to regain their cred in the Arab world after a campaign that was more anti-Nasser than anything else. The French had bigger fish to fry in Algeria and the Israeli military was reaching the end of its poorly-supplied tether.
As soon as a peacekeeping force gets there, the French will go home and the Israelis will withdraw. The Brits probably try to score an airbase or a at least a technical presence in the CZ. Egypt may be forced to join the Baghdad Pact. Arab Nationalism is going to be seeing some big butterflies.
The big news is that European neo-imperialism has received a second wind rather than the hat trick of defeats it suffered IOTL.
I have it happen in my Tail-Gunner TL, which I'll be re-launching sometime early next year.Could someone do a tl?
Yup. France, though, is going to have to come to terms with Algeria one way or the other. The big question here is what effect a successful Suez War will have on that particular issue.That alone could lead to some pretty dire outcomes. Suez was a blunder OTL, the Anglo-French might not realized how much their victory was due to good fortune and try to pull stunts elsewhere which horribly backfire.
Is it? They did it pretty often IOTL, long after "Wind of change" and all that.The idea that an emboldened Israel & European powers thinking that they can remove goverments in trid world nations at whim would be better than OTL, is rather fanciful.
I have it happen in my Tail-Gunner TL, which I'll be re-launching sometime early next year.
How's that for a shameless plug?![]()
Yup. France, though, is going to have to come to terms with Algeria one way or the other. The big question here is what effect a successful Suez War will have on that particular issue.
Is it? They did it pretty often IOTL, long after "Wind of change" and all that.
And Israel wouldn't be emboldened by a successful Suez. If anything, they'll be kept on a pretty tight leash by a Britain that doesn't want to see any Arab feathers ruffled.
Aww, g'wanWell, thats good Tail-Gunner was one of the best TL's on the board.![]()
Ugh. What a mess that would be.I cant see them turning things around, but they might try to cling on longer or crave out ''settler enclaves'' whilst leving the rest for the Arabs....
Ah, I see what you're saying, and I agree 100%. And it would likely be worse all-around. Katanga and Kasai in particular could get very messy.Well these things often ended badly & French unilateralism in Africa was (and is) pretty appalling OTL, it could be far worse ITTL
The Israelis are going to be incredibly leery about attacking British-backed, British-supplied neighbors. Syria, on the other hand...I disagree. Simply because I dont see Israel ever giving half-a-damn what the British goverment wants. Israel has its own agenda which it has always ruthlessly followed. The Israeli's want the Arabs states to be weak & non-threatening, nothing Britain can do will alter that.
The Israeli's have helped remove one nationlist Arab rabble-rouser, they might try to remove or otherwise get rid of others they deem a threat.
How about something similar to what US had with the Panama Canal Zone but on say a 99 year lease like Hong Kong was? The Suez Canal Zone extends a couple of miles either side of the canal and is run by a Anglo-French administration with some form of co-operation with the Egyptian government with regards to running Ismailia, Port Said, Port Suez and the like. Egypt retains ownership of the Sinai but agrees to have it as a demilitarised area supervised by the UN, and as part of their ownership of the Canal Zone the Anglo-French administration has to build and maintain the bridges and tunnels over the canal and allow free transit for all non-military traffic.The Brits probably try to score an airbase or a at least a technical presence in the CZ. Egypt may be forced to join the Baghdad Pact. Arab Nationalism is going to be seeing some big butterflies.
How about something similar to what US had with the Panama Canal Zone but on say a 99 year lease like Hong Kong was? The Suez Canal Zone extends a couple of miles either side of the canal and is run by a Anglo-French administration with some form of co-operation with the Egyptian government with regards to running Ismailia, Port Said, Port Suez and the like. Egypt retains ownership of the Sinai but agrees to have it as a demilitarised area supervised by the UN, and as part of their ownership of the Canal Zone the Anglo-French administration has to build and maintain the bridges and tunnels over the canal and allow free transit for all non-military traffic.
Oh I never said it would be a good thing.Chances are it will backfire horribly in the long run.
Oh I never said it would be a good thing.It would achieve the three powers general aims of the French and British maintaining control of the canal and keeping their influence and securing Israel's western flank giving them some breathing room whilst keeping a weather eye on Syria so it seemed possible. Where would be the fun in things if it all turned out perfectly though?
![]()