How Egypt’s Suez Canal Story Resonated in Latin America

Standing in front of a crowd in Alexandria’s sprawling Mohammed Ali Square, former President Gamal Abdel Nasser teases the crowd with his enigmatic smile before his speech, then finally takes the microphone and begins to talk about nationalizing the Suez Canal. “Today we are going to get rid of what happened in the past; some of your fellow citizens have just seized the canal.

The speech sent shockwaves across Egypt and the world, but it did not stop at the region or Europe, but also across the oceans in Latin America. Egypt, for the Venezuelan politician Juan Pablo Pérez Alfonzo, showed the world that “human solidarity could face gross injustices” and that small nations, or developing nations, could exploit a business as large as the Suez Canal.

So much has passed and so many years have passed that today this historic event no longer shakes us so much and no longer inspires visions for the future. But at the time, it echoed and influenced two key events: the Panama Canal and the founding of OPEC.

From Western oil majors to OPEC

When Pérez Alfonzo became Minister of Mines and Hydrocarbons in 1959, he aspired to control oil prices and put a cartel from an oil-producing country in place of the private cartel of multinational oil companies. His visions were aligned with Nasser’s aspiration for countries to independently manage their economies and prevent foreign powers from controlling oil prices.

A meeting took place in Cairo between April 16 and 23, 1959 between Pérez Alfonzo and other Arab leaders, including Abdullah Tariki, the oil minister of Saudi Arabia. At that time, the oil industry was controlled by Western oil majors and involved little or no involvement from host developing countries. Developing countries had no say in how their resources were used and exploited, and had no authority to determine the future of their economies.

The meeting led to the co-creation of OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries), which today not only protects the interests of oil-producing countries, but also illustrates once again that the countries of the Middle Middle and Latin America can come together and take control. their own economy and their destiny.

Panama Canal

The researcher Federico Vélez also offers an interesting historical analysis on the influence of the policies of Gamal Abdel Nasser on Latin America, in particular the Panama Canal.

Vélez explains that before the events at Suez, the United States built a canal in Panama after the Colombian Congress refused to accept the conditions initially agreed to by the two governments, and the United States obtained the right to use, occupy and control the five-mile zone on either side of the waterway, also known as the Canal Zone.

However, Panamanian nationalism grew and eventually came to a head with the events at the Suez Canal. Nasser’s courage to oppose British colonialism and nationalize the Suez Canal began to appear as a thorn in the negotiations between the United States and Panama, as Vélez argues, which forced the United States to resume negotiations and accept a recalculation of royalties, as well as a promise to improve the working and economic conditions of Panamanians working in the American zone.

When President Eisenhower asked his Secretary of Defense to negotiate with the Panamanian government and improve working conditions, he stressed that he did not want the situation to end like the one the British had to face. at Suez, and that the negotiations should not result in “incurring the risk of shared control”.

In a memo to the Assistant Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs, the acting officer for Central American and Panamanian Affairs, said the “Panamanians…have made no secret of the fact that they are following with a Keen interest in the developments in the Suez.The Panamanian government is no doubt awaiting the day when it can somehow emulate the recent action of Egypt.

Nasser’s policies prompted university students in Panama City to call a General Assembly and demand that the Panamanian government abolish the 1903 treaty and give full support to the cause in Egypt. In the late 1950s, groups of students began a series of peaceful protests against the American presence in the Canal Zone and a “sovereignty” rally to demand the presence of the Panamanian flag in the zone.

After events culminated in a general uprising and resulted in the destruction of American property, the United States allowed the Panamanians to raise their flag alongside the American flag in the Canal Zone. Panama’s new leader, General Omar Torrijos, negotiated a final agreement with the United States in 1977, which abrogated the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty of 1903, returning full sovereignty and control of the canal and area of the canal in Panama.

Yet, fast-forwarding to the present day, it’s hard to grasp how much of an impact the Suez Canal has had on world politics, and even Torrijos himself, when asked by a reporter about the use of Nasser as a model for his country, asked: “What does Nasser do?

Nevertheless, as the world continues to struggle with the remnants of neocolonialism, the history of the Suez Canal may once again ring a bell for those who wish to subjugate and control the resources of other nations.

Subscribe to our newsletter