Alt History: Israel loses in 1948

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

Couldn't that result in more infighting among states and possibly an even more violent region?

Very easily. A large part of the reason for anti-Israel speeches is keeping a lid on by providing an enemy.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by Captain-Captain

The state of Israel is overpowered and ceases to exist. Things do not go well for recent Jewish immigrants nor for native born Jews either but the king of Jordan does makes a distinction and makes it very easy for them to leave.

This is the carrot to the stick of staying there.

There will be no Palestinian problem, no unifying Israeli enemy on their to deal with. Without that, far less anti-American opinion in the middle east. Major oil producing national governments are stronger allies because nothing really conflicts with their lucrative trade with the Western oil companies.

So what happens?

The Soviets put their efforts where?

Are thext proxy wars between the US in Africa, South and Central America or Southeast Asia as in our timeline?

Actually there would certainly be a Palestinian problem. There was organized Palestinian violence before the State of Israel and violent revolutionaries do not suddenly stop because they won. Being a revolutionary is just to much fun and actually forming a civilization on the rubble of the revolution requires work. Revolutionaries just find a reason why they haven't won "yet". The Grand Mufti was surely not going to let his territory be divided by Arab monarchs, nor vice-versa nor is he going to let it be easy for Jews to leave, let alone to stay under the doubtful protection of said Arab monarchs. And there is something distasteful about having the ethnic cleansing of Jews be a carrot as long as one is not a Jew oneself. And it is not even clear that there will be no anti-American opinion in the Middle East not least considering that for a long time it was westerners who discovered oil and used it, Arab commoners who worked it, and Arab nobles who just grew fat with it.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Captain-Captain

They were scattered in the Era of Rome and scattered again in this event. The US very likely absorbs a huge chunk of themb ut there does not have to be a Jewish homeland.

Rome was scattering them from one part of their territory into the rest of it, to dilute their ability to resist. That's what happened in the previous diaspora as well. And by 1948 it was not so easy to cross national boundaries as it had been in previous Jew expulsions.

A I stated in post #3:

"More factionalism, a more balkanized middle east, the oil producing states more dependent on US Military aid, and secure in their power, more local tyranny."

No. They would not be any more dependent on U.S. military, nor any less. Nor would they be any more secure in their power. And my point was, most of the Middle East is more angry about the Americans doing things like backing and sheltering the Shah of Iran than they are about American protection of Israel.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

Very easily. A large part of the reason for anti-Israel speeches is keeping a lid on by providing an enemy.

On the other hand it is not the violence of the Middle East that puts it in the news. Plenty of places are actually more violent. It is the strategic importance, the historical significance. And possibly though seldom mentioned, the fact that visiting newsfolk get better hotels.

[doulos05]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

Actually there would certainly be a Palestinian problem. There was organized Palestinian violence before the State of Israel and violent revolutionaries do not suddenly stop because they won. Being a revolutionary is just to much fun and actually forming a civilization on the rubble of the revolution requires work. Revolutionaries just find a reason why they haven't won "yet". The Grand Mufti was surely not going to let his territory be divided by Arab monarchs, nor vice-versa nor is he going to let it be easy for Jews to leave, let alone to stay under the doubtful protection of said Arab monarchs. And there is something distasteful about having the ethnic cleansing of Jews be a carrot as long as one is not a Jew oneself. And it is not even clear that there will be no anti-American opinion in the Middle East not least considering that for a long time it was westerners who discovered oil and used it, Arab commoners who worked it, and Arab nobles who just grew fat with it.

Most definitely this. The most likely result is that the Palestinians are subdued by whichever Mid Eastern nation ends up controlling that territory. The Palestinians aren't going to get to make their own nation out of land occupied by Egypt and Jordan anymore than they are going to get to do so out of land occupied by Israel.

[Peter Knutsen]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

<snort> In order to make it very easy for them to leave there has to be a place that would welcome a flood of penniless and stateless refugees. Most likely they'd end up in refugee camps shooting rockets at Jordan.

Jewish populations tend to produce a disproportionate amount of scientists.

I could well imagine some statesman, as opposed to a politician who by job description is - must be - short-sighted, inviting all the Jews to his country, being willing to put up with their pennilessness in exchange for the long-term benefits of getting more science done faster.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

Jewish populations tend to produce a disproportionate amount of scientists.

I could well imagine some statesman, as opposed to a politician who by job description is - must be - short-sighted, inviting all the Jews to his country, being willing to put up with their pennilessness in exchange for the long-term benefits of getting more science done faster.

While we may prefer to imagine it, the fact is that at no point in the years 1933-1948 in our history did this happen. Even the United States, historically the promised land for various groups of European economic and political refugees, had strict quotas for Jewish immigration in the 30s and 40s, even when it was clear that a major humanitarian crisis was on hand.

As for European countries, most of them either flatly forbade Jewish immigration or were willing to receive such miniscule numbers that it would make no noticable dent in the population made stateless by this Alternate History.

The probable outcome is a second Holocaust. As for the effects that would have on history, it's hard to predict, but I'll hazard a guess of 'nothing good'.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by Captain-Captain

There will be no Palestinian problem, no unifying Israeli enemy on their to deal with. Without that, far less anti-American opinion in the middle east. Major oil producing national governments are stronger allies because nothing really conflicts with their lucrative trade with the Western oil companies.

That's doubtful for a lot of reasons. An outright massacre of civilian Jews very likely *will* bring in foreign troops, and even if somebody would take them, lots of them are not going to leave, so there are going to be large Jewish populations in Palestine going forward to be a source of tensions. The trade war tactics have already starting up (remember one of the responses in 1948 was a UN embargo on the Arab states), and it is not like there are no other tensions. Really Israel is more a convenient rally point for tensions with the US than a cause of them. Even if there had never been a Zionist movement at all, there'd just be another one found. Likely the same one the rest of the world found - American support for non-democratic minority regimes and opposition to anything like reform evolving from anti-Communism.

Hm, I can pretty easily see united Jewish-Arab Communist insurgencies opposing American backed local regimes springing up. Don't forget in these early days Stalin had been providing support to the Zionists. Mostly because they were destabilizing the British sure, but when bunches of Zionists start screaming for the blood of the filthy Americans who turned their coats and abandoned them, and there will be some in this scenario, he's not going to pass up the opportunity to support that....

Are thext proxy wars between the US in Africa, South and Central America or Southeast Asia as in our timeline?

There are Communist insurgents in the Middle East in OTL too. There are Communist movements *everywhere*. Where they are revolutionaries, the US sends aid to the regime, no matter how terrible it is. Where they won, the US sends aid to opposition insurgents, no matter how terrible. And vice versa for the Soviet Union. Which ones we decide to consider proxy wars is less an issue of where the two powers were actually supporting clashes than it is of public perceptions. But yeah, there may be good odds of the Syria-Lebanon-Palestine one being considered one in this timeline. Always assuming that something like the Suez or the Turkish Straits dispute don't turn it into a non-proxy war.

[Astromancer]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

Come on, there are many reasons to detest Israel that have nothing to do with racism. The cold war gave the world loads of reasons to detest the U.S.

But not more reasons to detest the US than the Soviets gave them to detest the USSR. Picture a world were in 1945 the population of USA is magically transported to another planet is given lots of high-tech goodies and the knowlege to use and recreate them and lives in comfort and splender. Then picture the events on the Earth as the Red Armay realises it is the uncontested millitary power in Europe and Stalin enforces his vision of ideolgical purity on the whole wide world.

This would be a nicer world for the USA (except for missing out on the Beatles, Toho's monster movies, Peter Seller's, Doctor Who, and similar cool stuff) but it would be hell on everyone else, including the Russians.

[Astromancer]

The first thing I'd see from an Israeli defeat would be a surge of refugees headed towards the USA, Canada, and Australia, all nations with historically low levels of anti-semetic activity. Some of the talented folks that went to Israel and got killed or otherwise distracted (and Europe's Jews were a highly educated group that actualized their talents) would contribute to American life and culture.

A wider group of people on the European Hard-Right would sneer at America as that place run by Jews and White Supremicist groups would gas on about the Zog more often. America would gain, and the Arab political elites would blame someone else for all the failings. Both Soviet-style comunism and Arab-style Authoriterianism would both remain bad ideas.