Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
foreign relations (1951-1964) PART 2 - Coggle Diagram
foreign relations
(1951-1964)
PART 2
the korean war
heavy fighting, resulted in stalemate, agreed ceasefire (1953)
1000+ UK troops died
20+ countries supplied troops, Uk sent 90,000+ - 2nd biggest contingent after US
terms of ceasefire = korea split between communist north and non-communist south
condemned by UN, sent UN forces to combat invasion
korean war showed how cold war was being fought across whole world
1950, north korea forces, supported by USSR + China, invaded south
demonstrated UK's willingness to continue to play major role in world affairs - despite economic restraints
2 separate govts set up, each claiming legitimacy
however, was clear US was greater power
after WW2, Korea occupied by USSR in north, USA in south
suez
details of plan hidden from Parliament and Americans
plan put into operation (29th October 1956) - military action didn't go to plan, caused storm of political protest in UK, Labour opposed conflict, anti-war protests held, public opinion split on need for intervention
Israel invade Egypt, UK + France intervene, excuse would be to enforce peace, real affect would be to seize control of Suez
importantly, US opposed. UK was not strong enough in 1956 to stand up to USA pressure - plunged into serious financial crisis
encouraged by France + Israel, agreed on plan of action in top-secret meeting (Sevres)
Macmillan, invasion supporter, first to realise it was essential to pull out - even if it meant accepting failure + humiliation
Eden saw Nasser as 'an evil dictator who could not be allowed to get away with provoked aggression'
Eden's reputation was fatally damaged
Eden, considered export on foreign policy, his understanding of situation was influenced by belief that UK was imperial power + experience in fiercely opposing appeasement in 30s
Suez meant UK's position went through fundamental reassessment in a number of ways:
Nasser's actions placed Egypt on Soviet side of Cold War
1) questioned reputation as a force for good
Nasser announced nationalisation of Suez to provide finance needed for Aswan Dam that US + GB planned to invest in - pulled out 1956
2) highlighted inability to act without tactic USA support
emergence of Egyptian independence under new leader (Nasser) deeply worried Britain's strategic interests
3) brought into sharp relief, impact of economic + financial policy had on direction of foreign policy
vital route for oil shipments; 80% of western europe's oil imports passed through canal
4) undermined the belief that, in new global situation after WW, UK was still a major world power
winds of change + decolonisation
after Suez, policymakers reconsidered pace of decolonisation
1957, Ghana became first African colony to get independence from UK
struggle to contain Mau Mau already demonstrated colonial policy issues
Nigeria + Cyprus 1960
Mau Mau fighters accused of atrocities, revelations of brutal treatment of captivities at Hola prison camp = damaged reputation
Tanganyika + Sierra Leone 1961
Mau Mau rebellion, Kenya 1952, assumed would be easy to quash by military, independence was unthinkable at the time
Uganda 1963
early 1950s, Britain believed could manage gradual transition from Empire to New Commonwealth + could control movements until people were 'ready' for independence
Kenya 1963
not just Britain, France with Vietnam + Algeria, Belgium + Portugal with African colonies
shift in British policy signalled by Macmillan's 'winds of change'
British forces fought national independence movements in Malaysia, Cyprus + Kenya
before 1960, central aim of imperial policy = defeat nationalist revolts + maintain control over African colonies
1950s, colonial independence pressure movements = harder to contain
Macmillan's speech at Cape Town, described 'winds of change' blowing through Africa, a significant change of policy = decolonisation + recognition of independence; also able to persuade them to accept majority rule
1947, withdrawal from India - most dramatic example
in retrospect, policy was successful. process didn't always go as plan but completed swiftly with far less violence than others (Belgium + Portugal)
by 1951, empire retreat had already begun
1964, transition from Empire to Commonwealth represented significant achievement