WI Yom Kipur War launched in May 1973

[keedaman]

I recently read a book on the failure of Israeli intelligence to anticipate the Yom Kia rpur war. One thing that got my interest was that the Israelis had been informed by a highly placed Egyptian spy that the Egyptians planned to attack on the 15th of May. As response, the Israelis initiated the Blue-White counter-operation which consisted of training exercises for reservists, tank reinforcements in the Sinai and the Golan and a series of ramping up of military procurements. These preparations began in April and continued until the beginning of August when they were discontinued at a cost of 30 million dollars.

Whether this May war scare was real or a bit of misinformation by the Egyptians is still a bit of on open issue. One theory that was floated by the Israeli intelligence community is that there was an actual countdown to war in May but that the Soveits stopped it to prevent the Brezhnev-Nixon meeting in June 1973 from being affected. Assuming this theory is what actually happened, what would the affects of a Egyptian-Syrian attack during Blue-White that isn't vetoed by the Soviets be ?

[Riain]

Wasn't the whole point of choosing Yom Kippur because it was the most important Jewish holiday, more crippling to them than Christmas for us? Also, didn't Saddat drastically curtail Soviet influence to give himself a freer hand against Israel?

I could see Egyptian exercises being used to desentise Israel, the high cost of running counter-exercises meaning they can't be too jumpy of they'd be ruined economically.

[Anaxagoras]

IIRC, another theory was that the Arabs were testing the Israeli response and trying to lure them into a false state of security (a la "boy who cried wolf").

If the Arabs had attacked in 1973 when the Israelis were on alert, they would have been slaughtered. Rather than massing three infantry and two armored divisions in the Golan against two Israeli battalions as IOTL, the Syrians would have faced an Israeli force of considerable strength in prepared fighting positions, and they wouldn't have gained an inch. In Sinai, while the Egyptians might have still been able to cross the Suez in some places, any bridgehead they formed on the east side would have been quickly mopped up by Israeli armor.

Paradoxically, this might have been bad for Israel in the long run. Without the tactical successes the Egyptians achieved in the Yom Kippur War, and the consequent restoration of their honor and pride, President Sadat would not have been able to enter into that peace negotiations which lead to the Camp David Accords IOTL. Egypt would still be as great an enemy of Israel as Syria.

[Anaxagoras]

Originally Posted by Riain

Wasn't the whole point of choosing Yom Kippur because it was the most important Jewish holiday, more crippling to them than Christmas for us?

There's disagreement about this, and no one really knows for sure. In truth, the fact that the attack fell on Yom Kippur ended up helping the Israelis far more than it hurt them, since all their personnel were either at home or at the synagogue where they could easily be found, and the streets were completely free of civilian traffic, allowing for a speedy mobilization.

[Riain]

Yes, but the regulars and serving reservists, around whom mobilisation should occur, were on leave rather than work doing their thing. Perhaps, and I'm conjecturing here, if they were at work larger and more effective units would have been on the scene instead of the penny packets which got chewed up by Saggers in the first few hours/days.

[Cook]

Originally Posted by Anaxagoras

IIRC, another theory was that the Arabs were testing the Israeli response and trying to lure them into a false state of security (a la "boy who cried wolf").

I believe that was the purpose of the Egyptian ‘War of Attrition’ prior to the Yom Kippur War.