Let's say that despite American threats and the Egyptian resistance the French and British manage to successfully intervene in Suez. A few months of occupation in Suez later the Egyptian government falls into anarchy and the country falls into civil war. Israel occupies (de facto annexes) the Sinai whilst a UN zone is established in the canal. With the aid of French and British forces the Egyptian monarchy is restored.

What would be the immediate impact and consequences of such a successful intervention?
 
Well for starters, Operation Musketeer's success really depends upon American ambivalence/tacit support of the Anglo-French intervention. A POD I've been working on is Eisenhower dies of a heart attack in 1955, making Nixon, who had been secretly supportive of the intervention at the time, President.

The British did have a plan on toppling Nasser but his replacement would not have been King Farouk or the Egyptian monarchy but General Mohammed Naguib.

As for the impact and consequences of such an invasion, I'll try to address them one by one.

Britain: Decolonization had already sort of started by 1956 but Britain's plans mostly consisted on taking time to build up effective civil services in their colonies. Nations and ideas that fell into the dustbins of history like the East African Federation and the Central African Federation would likely be given more time to work out, likely gaining independence in the late 1960s or early 1970s.

As for the premiership, without Suez, the impetus and ability of Macmillan and Butler to chuck him out is gone. It is true Eden was not a particularly healthy man, he was practically living on Benzedrine during the Suez Crisis. However, his trips to Jamaica and New Zealand did seem to improve his health somewhat. In my mind, he hangs on. He'd probably win the 1959/60 election by similar proportions to Macmillan and then stand down before the 1964/65 election. His successor would likely not be the Earl of Home as in OTL but Macmillan, Butler, Maudling, or Viscount Hailsham.
 
Last edited:
Well for starters, Operation Musketeer's success really depends upon American ambivalence/tacit support of the Anglo-French intervention. A POD I've been working on is Eisenhower dies of a heart attack in 1955, making Nixon, who had been secretly supportive of the intervention at the time, President.
Not exactly. The American threats to attack the pound and franc were empty threats otl exemplified by the addition of Macmillan's false economical data. Economic Historians point out that the American economy would have hit a depression if the pound and franc were attacked and no one in America was willing to commit themselves to that for Egypt
The British did have a plan on toppling Nasser but his replacement would not have been King Farouk or the Egyptian monarchy but General Mohammed Naguib.
Very true. Guess you can call it a guilty pleasure of mine in regards to middle Eastern monarchies in general. Let's say Naguib restores the monarchy. He did hold some sympathies otl.
Britain: Decolonization had already sort of started by 1956 but Britain's plans mostly consisted on taking time to build up effective civil services in their colonies. Nations and ideas that fell into the dustbins of history like the East African Federation and the Central African Federation would likely be given more time to work out, likely gaining independence in the late 1960s or early 1970s.

As for the premiership, without Suez, the impetus and ability of Macmillan and Butler to chuck him out is gone without the political fallout of Suez hanging over his head. It is true Eden was not a particularly healthy man, he was practically living on Benzedrine during the Suez Crisis. However, his trips to Jamaica and New Zealand did seem to improve his health somewhat. In my mind, he hangs on. He'd probably win the 1959/60 election by similar proportions to Macmillan and then stand down before the 1964/65 election. His successor would likely not be the Earl of Home as in OTL but Macmillan, Butler, Maudling, or Viscount Hailsham.
Interesting what do you think about the effects on France and the wider cold war?
 
Interesting what do you think about the effects on France and the wider cold war?
Assuming that the Egyptian leadership after Suez was more UK-friendly, which I think it would have been, then it is unlikely that it would help the Algerian insurrection.

Now I don't know the full extent of post-56 Egyptian help to Algeria OTL given that the French monitored the borders, but this would likely have been a non-negligible blow to the FLN and other groups, not only regarding money and weapons but also political support. Whether that would be enough for France to stabilize the situation before the Generals' revolt made De Gaulle's return inevitable is uncertain, but if that was the case it would hugely change French politics and policy for decades. However even without De Gaulle Algeria would likely have become independent in the end as the situation was unsustainable, but it might have been on more favorable terms for the French and post-independence Egyptian support would have been reduced.

That aside, a (durably) Western-aligned Egypt would likely defuze most of the Israeli-Arab conflicts, although conflicts with Syria and Iraq could still happen. Would this even bring more Arab countries back to the West?
 
That aside, a (durably) Western-aligned Egypt would likely defuze most of the Israeli-Arab conflicts, although conflicts with Syria and Iraq could still happen. Would this even bring more Arab countries back to the West?

Yes, if there is one thing that is able to rally them to the west, its another blatant colonization, directed at the cultural heart of the arabian world. ;)

Expect even anti-communist people to become staunchly pro-Soviet.
 
Top