The geopolitical landscape of the Middle East and Africa underwent significant shifts during the Cold War, influenced heavily by the strategic interests of the superpowers.
Suez Crisis (1956)
Background
- The Suez Canal was constructed in the 19th century, primarily by the French and the British, and quickly became a lifeline for international maritime trade.
- By the 20th century, it was under British military control, ensuring easy access to colonies and maintaining a swift route to oil supplies.
- Egypt's President Gamal Abdel Nasser, seeking to end what was viewed as neocolonial control, nationalised the canal in 1956. This action was seen as a threat to Western Europe's oil supply and to Britain's and France's dwindling imperial prestige.
Superpowers’ Involvement
- US: The Eisenhower administration was placed in a quandary. Despite being traditional allies with Britain and France, the US was keen on winning hearts in the newly decolonising world. Supporting colonial powers would be contradictory to this objective. The US also feared pushing Arab nations towards the Soviet bloc.
- Soviet Union: While outwardly denouncing the invasion by Britain, France, and Israel, the Soviets were simultaneously dealing with the Hungarian Uprising and chose not to get militarily involved in Suez.
Significance in the Cold War Context
- The crisis marked a significant shift in global power dynamics, with colonial powers ceding geopolitical dominance to the superpowers.
- The event highlighted the US's role as an anti-colonial power, often in contradiction to its Cold War objectives.
Yom Kippur War (1973)
Background
- The Arab-Israeli conflict's roots lay in the creation of Israel in 1948 and the subsequent wars in 1948 and 1956.
- With territories lost in the Six-Day War of 1967, Arab states sought a way to regain their lost lands and prestige. The Yom Kippur War started with Egypt and Syria launching surprise attacks on Israel on the holiest day in the Jewish calendar.
Superpowers’ Involvement
- US: The Nixon administration, amidst its own domestic issues and the Vietnam War, provided substantial military aid to Israel, solidifying the US-Israeli alliance.
- Soviet Union: Keen on increasing its footprint in the Middle East, the Soviet Union supplied arms and support to Egypt and Syria.
Significance in the Cold War Context
- The superpowers' involvement risked direct confrontation, particularly during the nuclear alert of October 1973.
- The oil embargo by OPEC nations in retaliation to Western support for Israel led to a global energy crisis, emphasising the Middle East's strategic importance.
Angolan Civil War (1975-2002)
Background
- Angola's path to independence from Portugal was marred by the presence of several nationalist movements, primarily the MPLA, UNITA, and FNLA.
- As the Portuguese prepared to leave in 1975, these factions, previously united against colonial rule, turned on each other, sparking a civil war.
Superpowers’ Involvement
- US: The Ford administration, concerned about the spread of communism, supported the anti-MPLA forces. Initially, backing was given to FNLA, but as it became evident that UNITA was the stronger anti-MPLA force, US support pivoted.
- Soviet Union: Moscow, seeing an opportunity to gain a foothold in southern Africa, supported the MPLA. Crucially, they were joined by Cuba, whose involvement was more extensive on the ground, including combat troops.
Significance in the Cold War Context
- Angola became a battleground for ideologies, with both superpowers eager to establish friendly governments in the mineral-rich nation.
- The war demonstrated the Cold War's reach, extending to sub-Saharan Africa, and showcased how decolonisation could be manipulated for superpower gain.
These crises reveal the depth and breadth of the Cold War's reach, influencing events far from the primary theatres in Europe and Asia. Through this, we see the superpowers adapting and manoeuvring, often placing Cold War objectives above local concerns, and the implications of these actions on the regions in question.
FAQ
Decolonisation played a pivotal role in shaping the superpowers' strategies in the Middle East and Africa. As former colonies gained independence, they often faced power vacuums, political instability, and struggles for national identity. Both the US and the Soviet Union viewed these newly independent nations as potential allies or spheres of influence, leading to interventions or support based on Cold War alignments. For instance, in Angola, decolonisation led to a civil war where both superpowers supported opposing factions based on ideological lines. Similarly, in the Middle East, the Suez Crisis and the broader Arab-Israeli conflict were intricately linked to issues of national sovereignty post-decolonisation, with superpowers often intervening based on Cold War objectives.
The OPEC oil embargo of 1973, enacted in response to Western support for Israel during the Yom Kippur War, had profound global implications. It underscored the strategic importance of the Middle East and its oil reserves in the Cold War dynamics. The embargo led to quadrupled oil prices, triggering economic recessions in the West, particularly in the US and Western Europe. This economic vulnerability exposed the West's heavy reliance on Middle Eastern oil and highlighted the geopolitical leverage that oil-rich Arab nations had. In the Cold War context, it also provided an opportunity for the Soviet Union to try and increase its influence in the oil-rich region, further complicating superpower dynamics.
Yes, besides the ones discussed in the subsubtopic, there were other significant crises influenced by superpower rivalry. In the Middle East, the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) saw both superpowers attempting to influence the outcome, with the US initially supporting Iraq and the Soviet Union supplying arms to both sides. In Africa, the Ethiopian Civil War (1974-1991) witnessed superpower involvement, with the Soviet Union and Cuba supporting the Ethiopian government against various rebel groups, some of which received covert US support. Both regions were considered vital to the superpowers, and their interventions were often influenced by a combination of Cold War alignments and regional strategic interests.
Cuba's involvement in the Angolan Civil War was influenced by both ideological commitments and geopolitical considerations. Ideologically, Cuba, being a socialist state, was keen to support fellow Marxist or leftist movements in their struggles against imperialism and colonialism. Their backing of the MPLA was consistent with this commitment. Geopolitically, by aiding the MPLA, Cuba could strengthen its international standing, especially within the Non-Aligned Movement, and cement its role as a significant player in global Cold War politics. Moreover, while the Soviet Union was supportive of Cuban involvement, it is essential to recognise that Cuban actions were not merely directed by the Soviets; Cuba had its own independent foreign policy goals in Africa.
Nasser's decision to nationalise the Suez Canal was rooted in a combination of nationalism, economic needs, and geopolitical strategies. Firstly, the canal was a symbol of foreign dominance in Egypt, and its nationalisation was seen as a step towards asserting Egyptian sovereignty and anti-colonial sentiment. Secondly, revenues from the canal would provide much-needed funds for Nasser's ambitious Aswan Dam project, especially after the US and Britain withdrew their financial support for the dam. Lastly, in the broader Cold War context, Nasser aimed to navigate a non-aligned path, leveraging the superpower rivalry to Egypt's advantage. By nationalising the canal, he positioned Egypt as a significant player on the global stage.
Practice Questions
The superpowers' involvement in the Suez Crisis underlined the shifting dynamics of global power during the Cold War. The US's opposition to the tripartite aggression, despite traditionally allying with Britain and France, showcased its new position as a global arbiter and its intent to court post-colonial states against communism. The Soviet Union's stance, although aligned with the US against colonial aggression, was tempered by its preoccupation with the Hungarian Uprising, demonstrating the prioritisation of regional Cold War conflicts. The crisis signalled the decline of European colonial powers and the ascent of US and Soviet geopolitical dominance in post-colonial regions.
The Cold War profoundly shaped the trajectory of the Angolan Civil War, transforming it into a proxy battleground for ideological dominance. The MPLA, perceived as Marxist-leaning, received significant support from the Soviet Union and more directly from Cuba, reflecting the communist bloc's eagerness to expand its influence in Africa. The US, concerned about the potential spread of communism in the resource-rich region, shifted its support between anti-MPLA factions, notably from the FNLA to UNITA. Such superpower involvement not only prolonged the conflict but also intensified it, as ideological stakes became intertwined with the quest for national governance in post-colonial Angola.
