Find here all the rare interviews of the geneveMonde.ch editorial staff, the collaborative platform on the history of international Geneva, and the exceptional documents coming from the archives of the international organizations based in Geneva and digitized by us, the audio contents of the geneveMonde.ch thematic files as well as our various Sounds of History podcasts The interviews and podcasts are produced by the historian Véronique Stenger and the journalist David Glaser.
---
Retrouvez ici tous les entretiens rares de la rédaction de geneveMonde.ch, la plateforme collaborative sur l'histoire de la Genève internationale, et les documents exceptionnels venus des archives des organisations internationales installées à Genève et numérisées par nos soins, les contenus audio des dossiers thématiques de geneveMonde.ch ainsi que nos différents podcasts Sounds of History/Sons d'Histoire. Les entretiens et les podcasts sont produits par l'historienne Véronique Stenger et le journaliste David Glaser.
Copyright FONSART 2023
Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.
Find here all the rare interviews of the geneveMonde.ch editorial staff, the collaborative platform on the history of international Geneva, and the exceptional documents coming from the archives of the international organizations based in Geneva and digitized by us, the audio contents of the geneveMonde.ch thematic files as well as our various Sounds of History podcasts The interviews and podcasts are produced by the historian Véronique Stenger and the journalist David Glaser.
---
Retrouvez ici tous les entretiens rares de la rédaction de geneveMonde.ch, la plateforme collaborative sur l'histoire de la Genève internationale, et les documents exceptionnels venus des archives des organisations internationales installées à Genève et numérisées par nos soins, les contenus audio des dossiers thématiques de geneveMonde.ch ainsi que nos différents podcasts Sounds of History/Sons d'Histoire. Les entretiens et les podcasts sont produits par l'historienne Véronique Stenger et le journaliste David Glaser.
Copyright FONSART 2023
Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.
Second episode of our series "UN 80 : Eight Decades Between Hope and Hard Reality", about successes and failures of the United Nations in 80 years, with historian Thomas Gidney from the University of Geneva.
In July 1956, Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal, a key maritime route previously controlled by British and French interests. In October, Israel, soon joined by the United Kingdom and France, launched a military intervention against Egypt. London and Paris aimed to regain control of the canal and weaken Nasser, whom they saw as leaning toward the Soviet bloc.
Security Council Deadlock and the Veto Problem
The crisis was brought immediately before the United Nations Security Council. Despite the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union surprisingly agreed on one point: they demanded a ceasefire and the withdrawal of invading forces. However, both the UK and France—permanent members of the Council—used their veto power to block any binding resolution against themselves. This highlighted a structural weakness of the UN system: when a permanent member is directly involved in a conflict, the Council can become paralyzed.
Resolution 377 and Bypassing the Veto
To break the stalemate, the UN General Assembly invoked Resolution 377, known as “Uniting for Peace”. Adopted in 1950 during the Korean War, it allows the Assembly to convene an emergency special session when the Security Council is blocked by a veto and to recommend collective measures, including the use of armed force, to maintain international peace and security.
A Rare Diplomatic Success
Under combined pressure from the UN, the United States, and the Soviet Union, the UK and France eventually withdrew their forces. The episode strengthened the UN’s reputation, showing that it could act decisively even against a permanent member, provided the General Assembly stepped in. Yet this success depended on a rare alignment of political interests between Washington and Moscow - an alignment that is not easily replicated.
Parallels with Russia and Ukraine
In theory, Resolution 377 could be applied to the current Security Council deadlock over Ukraine, where Russia has repeatedly vetoed binding measures against itself. The General Assembly has already passed several resolutions condemning the invasion. However, the situation differs from Suez: in 1956, the two superpowers agreed on ending the aggression, whereas today, deep geopolitical divisions prevent any consensus on coercive measures.
Echoes in the 1960s: The Vietnam War
The Vietnam War revealed similar limits. The United States, as a direct party to the conflict, enjoyed implicit veto protection, without even needing to use the veto, because allied states would block any Security Council action. The General Assembly remained largely on the sidelines, demonstrating that Resolution 377, effective in a unique case like Suez, cannot overcome entrenched bloc divisions.
Interview by David Glaser
Thomas Gidney is the author of "An International Anomaly, Colonial Accession to the League of Nations".
Photo : "Port Said from the air" during the Suez Canal Crisis of 1956.
Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.
