WI: Israel invades Syria in early 80s?

Ismailov

Ismailov

Let's assume the Israeli objective is to reach Damascus and overthrow Assad. How possible is that, and how likely is it that other Arab states would intervene on Syria's behalf? (Presumably it would put Egypt in a very serious predicament, but I don't know about Jordan or how Iraq would handle it due to the whole Iran-Iraq War.)

If you're wondering why I ask this, it's because it may very well happen in a Cold War forum game I'm running, so second opinions are always nice.
 

Blackfox5

Militarily, Israel could reach Damascus. I don't think Assad is stupid enough to stay there and allow himself to be captured. He should have enough time to flee the city and move the government elsewhere. For simply surviving, he declares victory once the war is over.

In 1982, the Soviets are still in the game and will intervene to save their proxy. Their usual method of intervention is to inform the US that unless Israel stops, the Soviets will go apeshit. The US then tells Israel if they don't follow US instructions, they will abandon them at the UN and cut off their money. Israel then obeys because its survival at this time was still dependent on US goodwill.

If this is an unprovoked attacked not previously approved by Washington, then the US is going to come down hard on the Israelis - probably even before Moscow gets on the phone. If this invasion was provoked (Syria attacked), then likely the US will buy Israel some time. However, it won't be enough to overthrow Assad.

There is likely no Arab intervention on behalf of Syria. However, Egypt could very well revoke the peace treaty in protest of an unprovoked attack and ruins the big achievement of Israeli foreign policy in the last ten years. Government probably loses the next election - although I suspect that is outside your game rules.

Israel's diplomatic position in the early eighties does not give it much room to maneuver. Based on your previous forum game post, it doesn't seem like the player of Israel understands that.
 
Queeney

Queeney

Blackfox5 said:
There is likely no Arab intervention on behalf of Syria. However, Egypt could very well revoke the peace treaty in protest of an unprovoked attack and ruins the big achievement of Israeli foreign policy in the last ten years.
Click to expand...

And here's the catch: An Israeli government that follows through with unilaterally attacking Syria might also be reckless enough to revoke the peace treaty herself, possibly even before the last phase of withdrawal from Sinai (which, incidentally, happened in 1982 as well); if that happens, Egypt will likely seek UNSC arbitration. And if that fails, Egyptian military operations against Israel are suddenly on the table again.
 
GarethC

GarethC

Exactly when is important. Is there still a Sunni/Muslim Brotherhood insurgency ongoing, or has Assad killed them all at Hama in 1982? A careful Israeli campaign which includes a very very swift withdrawal could trigger the collapse of the Alawite Ba'ath regime.

I don't think Israel really wants to be policiing a country with two and and a half times its population; Damascus alone has a greater population than the West Bank does, and involves a 50km drive to get supplies to an occupying force.

But yes, Israel can probably win air superiority as they did in June 82 in Lebanon, though at a higher cost in planes and pilots (OTL claims of 80 kills without loss, even if exaggerated, are so unequal that it's pretty accepted that there was something systemically wrong with the Syrian Air Force) as more of the engagements will happen inside Syria proper with concomitantly greater air defences (though OTL there were some in Lebanon which were pretty much all destroyed, IIRC). And then they can probably outmanoeuvre the Syrian armoured formations. The Israeli goal in an offensive war however must not be to capture Damascus, but rather to concentrate on the destruction of the Syrian army - Sichelschnitt, not Schlieffen - they have to be able to respond to Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon as well, and want to get the reservists back into the labour force as quickly as possible, which means no extended deployment of large numbers of troops, particularly not as a garrison force.
 

Coiler

The CIA estimated what actions the Soviets could take on behalf of their client. It's from 1975, but not much would have changed.

They can send a tripwire force of marines and/or paratroopers in a few days, and beef up the Syrian air defense system with their own units in a similar period. Given more time and political leeway, they could deploy a full combined arms army in three months. The document does say the Syrians would likely write off Damascus and retreat beyond the IDF's supply lines in the event of an existential war.
 

Brundlefly

How was the relationship between Assad and Saddam Hussein at that time? They certainly had a beef and eventually fell out completely later. With both of them being at odds with each other, I don't see Israel going the full way against Assad at a time when its main enemy was Saddam Hussein. Iran as Israel's biggest threat emerged only later (bear in mind that there even was a secret cooperation between the secret services of Iran and Israel during the Iran-Iraq War). Also, the front lines in the Lebanese Civil war were not as clear-cut as the situation there is now (with the fully developed Tehran-Damascus-Hezbollah axis).
 
Queeney

Queeney

Iraq was already locked in a bloody war against Iran, and the country couldn't have afforded a two-front war against Iran and Israel.

At best, I could see a couple of thousand "military advisors" or "volunteer militiamen" being sent to Syria as a sign of goodwill and Arabian brotherhood.
 

miketr

Why is Israel going hard into Syria like this? As other posters noted that very much effects how things play out.

Michael
 
Ismailov

Ismailov

miketr said:
Why is Israel going hard into Syria like this? As other posters noted that very much effects how things play out.

Michael
Click to expand...
In game not much has changed besides a stronger UN presence in southern Lebanon, but Syria intends to deploy tons of additional troops into that country and this is also during the IRL crisis over the deployment of Syrian surface-to-air missiles.
 

miketr

Ismailov said:
In game not much has changed besides a stronger UN presence in southern Lebanon, but Syria intends to deploy tons of additional troops into that country and this is also during the IRL crisis over the deployment of Syrian surface-to-air missiles.
Click to expand...

Is this invasion of Syria in place of the 1982 Lebanon War? Or do both happen?

I could see Israel attempting to drive Syria out of Lebanon all together for example and perhaps that spiraling out of control before Israel going hard into Syria with just the delta's you state.

Michael
 
Ismailov

Ismailov

The game is still in late 1981 (i.e. September - December.) What Israel does in Lebanon will be up to the player, although the IRL bombardment of Beirut and other areas in June 1981 didn't happen.
 

wtw

The soviets will intervene against them, this would be a cause beli for them, as we see now days. That a lone would probably have made this not happen. Israel does not want to get into a war with the USSR. Invading Syria would do that. The US is not stupid enough to go to bat for them, the Religious Right would be and I can see a massive migration to Israel of evangelicals from the US to assist but other than some Jews coming, Israel would be a lone against the Soviets.
 
Ismailov

Ismailov

One other issue I'd imagine exists is the presence of UNDOF in regards to the Golan Heights. A whole bunch of UN military personnel are presumably going to die if this happens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top