Effect of no Holocaust on Arab World?

If the Holocaust had not happened, say if the Munich Conference had gone sour and the NAZIs had not had time to prepare for mass extermination, how differently would the Arab World have developed? Obviously, Israel would not have been reestablished, but what else?
 
If the Holocaust had not happened, say if the Munich Conference had gone sour and the NAZIs had not had time to prepare for mass extermination, how differently would the Arab World have developed? Obviously, Israel would not have been reestablished, but what else?
There would have been an even stronger basis for Israel without WW2. The pre-state already existed and the Palestinian leadership was mostly wiped out in the British war 36-39. The zionist revisionists were preparing for a 1940 invasion with Polish support.
 
I am not sure that with Nazis is any way that you could avoid foundation of Israel. It might delay with few years but not totally butterfly away.
 
Actually it is probably butterflied away. Zionism was controversial with Jews (not talking about everyone else) before the Holocaust, that changed things as most Jews then felt they needed their own country to be safe.
 
The PoD is in 1938 and by that time Israel is largely around with its own institutions and military and population, albeit on a much smaller scale.
 
If we go with 1938 as the PoD, then with no Nazi government threatening Europe, the British would be less inclined to support the Arabs (they viewed them as being wavering in terms of allegiance, compared to the Jews whom they felt were secure in their allegiance). With no threat, there's no White Paper of 1939, which means more Jews can come to Palestine - hundreds of thousands, maybe millions. Assuming that other European countries have right-wing or fascist governments come to power, and those governments enact antisemitic laws, Jews will have somewhere to go. And Palestine will look quite enticing for them, especially with American immigration quotas. Independence will probably happen around OTL.

And Zionism was pretty popular especially among Jews, particularly with Eastern European Jews (Western Jews in France and such tended to be more assimilationist), and Zionism was gaining ground actually. If there are no immigration quotas imposed by the UK, and the US keeps its immigration quotas from 1924, a large percentage of Jews will go to Palestine. The pull of Zionism was pretty strong in Poland, Lithuania, Belarus and countries like that. Even Greece had a strong Zionist movement, and immigration was quite high.

Yiddish will still be spoken in Israel and the world, and the Hasidic dynasties wiped out in OTL will no doubt continue to thrive. Ladino (Judeo-Spanish) will still be around as well, as that won't be given a death knell. I would imagine Mizrahi Jews would come to Palestine too, with the rise of Arab nationalism and the success of Jewish government in Palestine. Maybe including the Jews from Algeria, Morocco, and Tunisia.
 
According to what I've read, with a good portion of the 5.7 million Jews who died in the Holocaust willing to support Israel directly or indirectly with no Holocaust Israel would've probably come into existence far, far more populated and powerful than it has in our time line.

I could see due to population pressures and living space, Israel simply annexing huge portions of the West Bank and expelling anyone else living there.
 
No Holocaust

I imagine that after the surge in fascist and communist anti-Semitism surrounding then most eastern Jews would look to get out of the Pale. Given that the West was still blocked (San Remo), more would opt for Palestine. A larger Hagana , a larger economic base, more revisionist and non socialists may mean a more prosperous and larger Israel earlier than IOTL. This would likely lead to the fall of the Arab monarchies earlier than before. This may allow for more entrenched and stable dictator/dynasties then IOTL.
 
Perhaps anti-semitism would be less of a hot-button topic with no Holocaust. Many Arabs, obviously, did and still do hate the Israelis (of course, not for the sames reasons that the Nazis hated the Jews, but it can still be called anti-semitism), and their hatred may be treated more casually without such an obvious end point to such hatred being made real.

I'm not entirely sure whether not experiencing the Holocaust would make the behaviour of the Israelis in Palestine better or worse. (And that's all I feel confident in saying without risking a warning/ban.)
 
Actually it is probably butterflied away. Zionism was controversial with Jews (not talking about everyone else) before the Holocaust, that changed things as most Jews then felt they needed their own country to be safe.

And most anti-Zionist Jews were murdered. The domestic path to Israel had already been paved by this POD, but a significant difference could be that the world powers don't back Israel.
 
There are two things that I think need to be explored

Firstly, what do we mean when we say holocaust. The Nazis had a number of alternative plans for the Jews that were not as bad as the OTL holocaust, but in the same way that having your hands cut off is not as bad as decapitation. One involved mass sterilisation so that the Jews would die off in time. Another involved mass forced labour and resettlement in conquered Russian territory, with conditions that were designed to kill of 1/3 of Europe's Jews, whilst using them to support Germany's war effort. Does no holocaust preclude the more horrific alternatives?

The second is the extent to which the atrocities committed by the Nazis towards the Jews galvanises support for Zionism, both amongst Jews and the world's political elites. Without the horrors of the holocaust, it is entirely possible that the nascent UN won't call for a resolution on the partitioning of Palestine, or that the resolution doesn't get passed. Maybe the issue is delayed, allowing for a more diplomatic solution to take place. It may even be the case that, in the post-war euphoria Zionism starts to dwindle, with the most anti-Semitic regimes in the world now destroyed.

Also, if the holocaust is avoided, or at least greatly diminished, and European Jewry is, if not intact, at least considerably better shape, what role will Bundism, one of the dominant ideological alternatives to Zionism, play in the post-war Communist politics?
 
While the Holocaust is easy to point to as a cause of Israel, that's more propaganda pr plain bad history than truth. Israel was already in the making since the British Balfour declaration. On top of that, without Hitler and the Holocaust to put anti-antisemitism in mainstream thought, most of Europe would still be hostile to their jewish population. While German jews fled anyway, I imagine that without the Holocaust the USA would not allow the US to become the country with the highest jewish population in the world. We didn't allow changes due to increased antisemitism until post-WW2, so I don't imagine without some single manor atrocity against the jews that they would have any place to go in their minds but Israel. And while there may be anti-Zionist tensions in the jewish population, that will change with Israeli successes, as it did otl.
 
If the Holocaust had not happened, say if the Munich Conference had gone sour and the NAZIs had not had time to prepare for mass extermination...

What does happen instead? If the Munich Conference fails, and Hitler decides on war, and is overthrown by the Schwarze Kapelle...

Then not only is there no Holocaust, there is no WW II as we know it.

That has lots of other effects, including no weakening of British control over their empire (including mandates such as Palestine and their position in Egypt), continued French control of Lebanon and Syria.

British policy in Palestine could go two ways: with the Nazi regime gone, Britain may become actively hostile to a Jewish refuge there. Or, with less fear of attack, may be less inclined to placate the Arabs by excluding Jews.

There is also the question of direct influence of Nazi Germany on the Arabs; explicit meddling through the Mufti of Jerusalem, and also the effect of ex-Nazis who escaped to for instance Syria.

Another factor is Libya, which would remain an Italian colony - possibly indefinitely. It might be possible for Italian colonists to become a majority in Libya, which had only about 1M inhabitants. The conversion of an Arab and Moslem country to an extension of Europe would have a huge impact on the Arab world. (Israel may be considered such, but is politically, religiously, and linguistically separate from Europe; and in fact most Jewish Israelis are descended from Mizrahim from Asia and Africa.)

Alternatively, the war could play out largely as OTL, but the Nazis take out their anti-semitism in "mere" brutality - beatings, forced migration to ghettos, semi-starvation, murders, occasional massacres. This could effectively destroy the Jewish society of middle-eastern Europe; that is, the area between Germany and the USSR; but it would leave far more survivors. It would not be the Holocaust.

It would also mean that the Zionist premise (Jews are severely endangered in Europe) would be confirmed (if not as strongly as OTL). Before the war, most Jews regarded anti-semitic persecution as comparable to bad weather - annoying, but not fatal, passing, not permanent, and not worth abandoning one's home of centuries over.

Thus there could be much greater migration to Palestine in 1945-1950. The Zionists might abandon the plan for partition of Palestine and go for the whole country, as needed to accommodate greater numbers. With greater manpower, they could succeed. That opens up several possibilities:

1) There is no 1948 war equivalent. The Arabs of Palestine are outnumbered from the start and don't even fight. This is unlikely, though. If it happens, no Palestinian become refugees.

2) With greater manpower, the Zionists win the war quickly, and relatively few Palestinians become refugees. Most of those return home after the war.

These two outcomes have great effects on Lebanon and Jordan, both of which were destabilized by Palestinian migration; also on the Gulf States - many Palestinian exiles got jobs there after the oil boom.

It's also possible that with the less aggrieving outcome of the war, the other Arab states make peace with Israel.

3) The Zionists win the war even more decisively, and many more Palestinians become refugees. This undermines Jordan and possibly Lebanon.

4) The Zionists win the war, but with a much larger Jewish population, agree to the return of Palestinian refugees afterward. This could also lead to peace with the Arabs.

... how differently would the Arab World have developed?

See above.

Though perhaps what you're asking is "How would Arab thinking change if the historic mass murder program never happened?" And to that I have no answer.

One other possibility - if there is no 1948 war equivalent, or it is resolved with the least possible grief to Arabs, it may be possible that Arab countries don't persecute their Jewish populations and drive them to Israel. The continued presence of the Mizrahim in Arab countries could have lots of effects; as could the absence of the Mizrahim from Israel.

Obviously, Israel would not have been reestablished, but what else?

BTW, "re-established"? Is there really any continuity between the Herodian Tetrarchy and the State of Israel?
 
If we go with 1938 as the PoD, then with no Nazi government threatening Europe, the British would be less inclined to support the Arabs (they viewed them as being wavering in terms of allegiance, compared to the Jews whom they felt were secure in their allegiance). With no threat, there's no White Paper of 1939, which means more Jews can come to Palestine - hundreds of thousands, maybe millions. Assuming that other European countries have right-wing or fascist governments come to power, and those governments enact antisemitic laws, Jews will have somewhere to go. And Palestine will look quite enticing for them, especially with American immigration quotas. Independence will probably happen around OTL.

What does happen instead? If the Munich Conference fails, and Hitler decides on war, and is overthrown by the Schwarze Kapelle...

Then not only is there no Holocaust, there is no WW II as we know it.

That has lots of other effects, including no weakening of British control over their empire (including mandates such as Palestine and their position in Egypt), continued French control of Lebanon and Syria.

British policy in Palestine could go two ways: with the Nazi regime gone, Britain may become actively hostile to a Jewish refuge there. Or, with less fear of attack, may be less inclined to placate the Arabs by excluding Jews.
If there is no WW2 as we know it is at least possible that the British would implement the Peel Plan. That would have been to say the least interesting. Most of the Arab world would have opposed it, but the Hashemites would have been big gainers. The Plan also envisaged an international zone for the Holy Places - interesting to speculate who would have joined in for that.
 
how would arab thinking change?

It's very had to say how arab thinking would change. I see a lot of disturbing posts on news websites in which presumably arab posters simultaneous praise hitler for the Holocaust, lament that it did not go far enough and then state that it was all a hoax to enable the Jews to steal Palestine.
 
If there is no WW2 as we know it is at least possible that the British would implement the Peel Plan. That would have been to say the least interesting. Most of the Arab world would have opposed it, but the Hashemites would have been big gainers. The Plan also envisaged an international zone for the Holy Places - interesting to speculate who would have joined in for that.

It's indeed possible the British would implement the Peel Commission's recommendation, and the Hashemites would definitely be the big winners. But there's going to be two main issues; the first is that the Peel Commission has already failed (it's after the POD), and the second is one of the things that will be in immediate memory is the 1936-39 Arab revolt in Palestine. This is going to be the lingering specter for any British attempt at partition. There may be an attempt to base negotiations off the Peel Commission and the borders they proposed, but it won't be easy for the British to govern Mandate Palestine.

But what I think is going to happen, is if the British put out a White Paper of 1939, the League of Nations is going to say it's inconsistent with the principles of the mandate. In OTL, WW2 stopped any further talks of it (they were supposed to start in September 1939); in TTL, the League will have talks of it. And most likely, the White Paper is going to be dismissed if it is created.
 
Top