美国在苏伊士运河危机中的作用和影响
发布时间：2018-09-12 16:50
【摘要】：1956年发生的苏伊士运河危机是一次复杂的国际事件，也是冷战时期比较重要的事件之一。它虽然只持续了几个月，但它的起因和过程都是复杂的，美国在整个危机中发挥了微妙的作用。危机的结果影响了美国对中东的政策以及美英、美埃关系的发展，危机所引起的后果是深远的，，并远远超出了中东的范围。 在这场危机中，美国、英国、法国、以色列、埃及、苏联等国都有充分的表演，虽然它是发生在埃及的事件，却是大国博弈的一次典型事件。在这其中，美国在危机的过程中起到了十分重要的平衡作用。美国在苏伊士运河危机中采取了和平解决危机的政策，为危机的和平解决做出了极大的努力，但它的政策受到英法等国的抵触，未能阻止战争的爆发，又产生了预想不到的后果。 近代的苏伊士运河于1869年正式开通，苏伊士运河公司成立于1858年，之后公司由英法两国把持。美苏冷战开始后，美苏两国对中东的争夺加剧，埃及也成为重要的争夺目标。埃及拒绝加参加美国推动成立的巴格达条约组织，并向苏联购买军火武器，美国就以取消援建阿斯旺水坝的贷款为手段逼迫埃及，纳赛尔却宣布将苏伊士运河公司收归国有，由此导致了了苏伊士运河危机的爆发。可见，危机的发生既与苏伊士运河的历史渊源相关，又与当时美苏冷战的时代背景相连。 苏伊士运河危机爆发后，与运河有重大利益关系的国家都做出了不同反应，各个国家的不同反应为以后实行不同的政策埋下了伏笔。美国做出了和平解决危机的决定，但是在具体的政策和实施上却受到国内各种因素的影响，美国的国会、公众舆论、中央情报局、总统和国务卿在苏伊士战争爆发以前，做出了不同的决策和产生了不同的影响。国会和公众舆论并未产生实质性的作用，只是成为总统反对战争的一个工具。中央情报局没有提供准确和完全肯定的情报，致使美国未能及时阻止战争的爆发，却从另一面限制了美国和平手段所起的作用。总统和国务卿是美国外交政策的最终决定者，他们为和平解决危机进行了长达三个月的马拉松式的谈判，虽然没有改变英法使用武力的想法，却延迟了战争的爆发。 苏伊士运河战争爆发后，影响美国外交决策的各部门，主要包括国家安全委员会、参谋长联席会议、中央情报局、总统和国务卿又开展了不同的的外交政策和实践，对战争的结束起到了重要的作用。美国国家安全委员会讨论制定了停火决议草案，美国参谋长联席会议提供了军事方面的信息和建议，美国在军事方面做好了准备，美国中央情报局对苏联方面的情报分析准确，把苏联威胁当作迫使英法投降的一种手段。艾森豪威尔和杜勒斯继续致力于外交实践，对促使战争的结束起到了至关重要的作用。 美国在整个危机中的外交决策和实践的过程中对不同国家产生了不同的影响。英法方面，战争发生之前，英法反对美国的政策，又想得到美国的支持，一方面与美国进行外交谈判，希望争取美国对他们军事行动的支持，另一方面对美国的失望和抱怨不断增多，最终与美国分道扬镳发动了战争。战争发生之后，在美国的调和和压力之下，又不得不接受停火决议，从埃及撤军。埃及方面，埃及支持美国的政策，希望通过美国限制英法的行为以缓解危机，战争发生后，又全力抵抗英法以的入侵，联合美国共同迫使了英法以三国的撤军。苏联方面，美国警告苏联不要使用武力，苏联不想与美国发生武力战争，只想利用这场战争获取利益，所以未军事干涉苏伊士运河危机。美国作为一个大国，在危机中发挥了重要的平衡作用，让英法与苏埃相互制衡，改变了危机的走向和结局。
[Abstract]:The Suez Canal Crisis in 1956 was a complex international event and one of the more important events during the Cold War. Although it lasted only a few months, its causes and processes were complex. The United States played a subtle role in the whole crisis. The outcome of the crisis affected American policy towards the Middle East and the United States, Britain and the United States. The consequences of the development of the relationship between Egypt and Egypt are far-reaching and far beyond the Middle East.
In this crisis, the United States, Britain, France, Israel, Egypt, the Soviet Union and other countries have full performances, although it happened in Egypt, but it is a typical event in the game of great powers. Among them, the United States played a very important balance in the process of the crisis. The United States adopted a peaceful settlement in the Suez Canal crisis. The policy of crisis has made great efforts for the peaceful settlement of the crisis, but its policy has been contradicted by Britain, France and other countries. It has failed to prevent the outbreak of war and has produced unexpected consequences.
The modern Suez Canal was officially opened in 1869, and the Suez Canal Company was founded in 1858. It was then controlled by Britain and France. Arms and weapons, the United States to cancel loans to build Aswan Dam as a means to force Egypt, Nasser announced the nationalization of the Suez Canal Company, which led to the outbreak of the Suez Canal crisis.
After the Suez Canal Crisis broke out, countries with great interests in the canal made different reactions, and the different reactions of each country paved the way for different policies in the future. Public opinion, the CIA, the President and the Secretary of State made different decisions and had different impacts before the Soviet War broke out. Congress and public opinion did not play a substantive role, but became a tool for the President to oppose the war. The CIA did not provide accurate and fully affirmative information, resulting in the United States Failure to stop the outbreak of war in time limits the role of American peaceful means on the other hand.
After the outbreak of the Suez Canal War, the various departments that influenced American foreign policy-making, including the National Security Council, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Central Intelligence Agency, the President and the Secretary of State, carried out different foreign policies and practices, which played an important role in the end of the war. The National Security Council of the United States discussed and formulated a cease-fire decision. In the draft, the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff provided military information and suggestions, the United States was ready for military preparations, the CIA was accurate in its intelligence analysis of the Soviet Union, and regarded the Soviet threat as a means of forcing Britain and France to surrender. The end played a crucial role.
In Anglo-French aspect, before the war, Britain and France opposed American policy and wanted American support. On the one hand, they negotiated diplomatically with the United States, hoping to win the support of the United States for their military action, on the other hand, they wanted the support of the United States. After the war, under the mediation and pressure of the United States, Egypt had to accept the cease-fire resolution and withdraw its troops from Egypt. Egypt supported the U.S. policy and hoped to alleviate the crisis through the U.S. restrictions on Anglo-French actions. After the war, Egypt resisted fully. The Soviet Union warned the Soviet Union not to use force, the Soviet Union did not want to use force war with the United States, only want to use this war for profit, so no military intervention in the Suez Canal crisis. The balance function made the checks and balances between Britain and France and the Soviet Union changed the trend and outcome of the crisis.
【学位授予单位】：山东师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：K153
本文编号：2239625
[Abstract]:The Suez Canal Crisis in 1956 was a complex international event and one of the more important events during the Cold War. Although it lasted only a few months, its causes and processes were complex. The United States played a subtle role in the whole crisis. The outcome of the crisis affected American policy towards the Middle East and the United States, Britain and the United States. The consequences of the development of the relationship between Egypt and Egypt are far-reaching and far beyond the Middle East.
In this crisis, the United States, Britain, France, Israel, Egypt, the Soviet Union and other countries have full performances, although it happened in Egypt, but it is a typical event in the game of great powers. Among them, the United States played a very important balance in the process of the crisis. The United States adopted a peaceful settlement in the Suez Canal crisis. The policy of crisis has made great efforts for the peaceful settlement of the crisis, but its policy has been contradicted by Britain, France and other countries. It has failed to prevent the outbreak of war and has produced unexpected consequences.
The modern Suez Canal was officially opened in 1869, and the Suez Canal Company was founded in 1858. It was then controlled by Britain and France. Arms and weapons, the United States to cancel loans to build Aswan Dam as a means to force Egypt, Nasser announced the nationalization of the Suez Canal Company, which led to the outbreak of the Suez Canal crisis.
After the Suez Canal Crisis broke out, countries with great interests in the canal made different reactions, and the different reactions of each country paved the way for different policies in the future. Public opinion, the CIA, the President and the Secretary of State made different decisions and had different impacts before the Soviet War broke out. Congress and public opinion did not play a substantive role, but became a tool for the President to oppose the war. The CIA did not provide accurate and fully affirmative information, resulting in the United States Failure to stop the outbreak of war in time limits the role of American peaceful means on the other hand.
After the outbreak of the Suez Canal War, the various departments that influenced American foreign policy-making, including the National Security Council, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Central Intelligence Agency, the President and the Secretary of State, carried out different foreign policies and practices, which played an important role in the end of the war. The National Security Council of the United States discussed and formulated a cease-fire decision. In the draft, the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff provided military information and suggestions, the United States was ready for military preparations, the CIA was accurate in its intelligence analysis of the Soviet Union, and regarded the Soviet threat as a means of forcing Britain and France to surrender. The end played a crucial role.
In Anglo-French aspect, before the war, Britain and France opposed American policy and wanted American support. On the one hand, they negotiated diplomatically with the United States, hoping to win the support of the United States for their military action, on the other hand, they wanted the support of the United States. After the war, under the mediation and pressure of the United States, Egypt had to accept the cease-fire resolution and withdraw its troops from Egypt. Egypt supported the U.S. policy and hoped to alleviate the crisis through the U.S. restrictions on Anglo-French actions. After the war, Egypt resisted fully. The Soviet Union warned the Soviet Union not to use force, the Soviet Union did not want to use force war with the United States, only want to use this war for profit, so no military intervention in the Suez Canal crisis. The balance function made the checks and balances between Britain and France and the Soviet Union changed the trend and outcome of the crisis.
【学位授予单位】：山东师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：K153
【参考文献】
中国期刊全文数据库 前8条
1 武向峰;;苏伊士运河战争前的美国外交决策分析[J];重庆科技学院学报(社会科学版);2008年11期
2 杨冬燕;关于1956年苏伊士运河危机的英美外交史学[J];世界历史;2001年04期
3 兰岚;;20世纪50年代美国的中东政策——从欧米加计划到艾森豪威尔主义的诞生[J];世界历史;2009年01期
4 罗会钧;美国与1956年苏伊士运河危机[J];湖南师范大学社会科学学报;1998年06期
5 温显娟;论苏伊士运河战争中的英美关系[J];历史教学;2003年10期
6 杨冬燕;巴格达条约的形成及其对中东的影响——英美在中东的矛盾与争夺[J];南京大学学报(哲学.人文科学.社会科学版);2001年02期
7 胡才珍;左昌飞;;从苏伊士运河事件看英美“特殊关系”[J];武汉大学学报(人文科学版);2006年02期
8 朱伟东;苏伊士运河战争后英美“特殊关系”的变化[J];西安联合大学学报;2001年01期
中国硕士学位论文全文数据库 前6条
1 杨小林;试析艾森豪威尔政府的中东政策[D];陕西师范大学;2001年
2 冯志伟;艾森豪威尔、杜勒斯与美国外交政策的制定（1953—1959）[D];陕西师范大学;2002年
3 石玉瑶;英国麦克米伦时期外交政策调整探析[D];华中师范大学;2006年
4 褚浩;艾森豪威尔政府对埃及政策研究[D];云南师范大学;2006年
5 汪芳;论哈罗德·麦克米伦与苏伊士运河危机[D];浙江大学;2007年
6 戴中伏;论二战后艾登的对埃政策[D];浙江师范大学;2009年
本文编号：2239625
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/xifanglishiwenhua/2239625.html
最近更新
教材专著
