Kissinger in the Kremlin - ten more days in October

[shai]

In October 1973 Israel was surprised. The Yom Kippur war came to them as a surprise. You know who else was surprised? The US. Specifically, the CIA. By that time, the US and the USSR had an agreement that they would inform each other if a war wad about to start, so the cold war won't turn warm by surprise. Yet, the US were as surprised as Israel on October 6th. But the Soviets weren't as surprised. They evacuated their men before the war, which was the sign of the upcoming war everybody ignored.

During the war, Kissinger went to the Kremlin in an effort to stop the war. He was ambushed. The Soviet Union demanded him to stop Israel, so a ceasefire will come to be. In our TL, Kissinger fell into the ambush. He didn't stand up to the Soviets for breaking that fundemental agreement. This led to the ceasefire in October 24th.

BUT WHAT IF HE DIDN'T?! What if instead of giving up to the soviets, Kissinger wouldvew had stood up against the Soviets, telling them that they had dishonoured the agreement and therefore he wouldn't stop Israel?

In my opinion, three main things would've happened. 1. The 3rd Egyptian army would've been completely eliminated, if by surrender or if by military means. 2. The IDF would either have conquered Damascus, or have surrounded it by November 1st. 3. The IDF will be within artillery range from Cairo.

In this situation, Israel will have the power to dictate whatever conditions it wanted. This'll probably mean that Israel will demand peace for retreating to the 67' borders, while keeping the Sinai peninsula. In addition, I believe that the ba'ath regime in Syria would've been overthrown, and that Egypt will become a part of the American sphere of influence.

What do you think would've happened?

 

[alexmilman]

In October 1973 Israel was surprised. The Yom Kippur war came to them as a surprise. You know who else was surprised? The US. Specifically, the CIA. By that time, the US and the USSR had an agreement that they would inform each other if a war wad about to start, so the cold war won't turn warm by surprise. Yet, the US were as surprised as Israel on October 6th. But the Soviets weren't as surprised. They evacuated their men before the war, which was the sign of the upcoming war everybody ignored.

During the war, Kissinger went to the Kremlin in an effort to stop the war. He was ambushed. The Soviet Union demanded him to stop Israel, so a ceasefire will come to be. In our TL, Kissinger fell into the ambush. He didn't stand up to the Soviets for breaking that fundemental agreement. This led to the ceasefire in October 24th.

BUT WHAT IF HE DIDN'T?! What if instead of giving up to the soviets, Kissinger wouldvew had stood up against the Soviets, telling them that they had dishonoured the agreement and therefore he wouldn't stop Israel?

In my opinion, three main things would've happened. 1. The 3rd Egyptian army would've been completely eliminated, if by surrender or if by military means.

Taking into an account that in OTL Israel and Egypt signed a peace treaty, what's the gain in having more killed or in having to fed more POWs?

2. The IDF would either have conquered Damascus, or have surrounded it by November 1st.

And do what? Every bleeding heart in Europe would be moaning about the killed innocent civilians and it is not like Israel had any intention to conquer Syria, anyway.

3. The IDF will be within artillery range from Cairo.

The same question: and then what?

In this situation, Israel will have the power to dictate whatever conditions it wanted.

The most important thing it wanted was to have a reasonably friendly Egyptian government which it got.

In addition, I believe that the ba'ath regime in Syria would've been overthrown,

And replaced with what? Realistic alternative to the Ba'ath regimes was and still is Muslim fundamentalism (as we had chance to see in Egypt and Syria). So what's the gain for Israel?

and that Egypt will become a part of the American sphere of influence.

Which to a big degree it became in OTL.

 

[shai]

snip

First of all, your completely right. Israel didn't have the reason to act as I described. I see no reason for Israel to act so (and BTW, after crossing the Suez channel, IDF units didn't really know what to do with themselves). My question is about what would've happened if a ceasefire wouldn't have been achieved by October 24th. The actions I said i think Israel would take are because they themselves didn't know what else to do, and having the ability to finally use their advantage, being able to maneuver, they'd probably get lost and advance with no reason. I don't see a reason for the Israeli generals to stop the attack besides a ceasefire that was forced on them. The need to turn this into a 67' like victory would have probably sent them towards Damascus and Cairo, not for a strategic or tactic reason, but because of their need to be victorious, which definitely wasn't filled IOTL.

The thing is, I looking for other ideas about what would have happened, not for criticism (I'm not angry or something, I just feel like you didn't answer my question, like, at all) against my imaginary scenario, as weird and implausible as might be.

 

[Michel Van]

Things would getting hot very hot !

If Kissinger gamble on time, the nervous Soviets will take the Nuclear option under consideration
No one expected that Arab state would Attack Israel and get "woop assed" by Israel army in such way.
For Soviets was total disaster not only there Allies failed, but also the Soviets weapons and military doctrines used, failed...
The Politburo really consider to move mobil nuclear launcher to south USSR to hit Israel if they move further in there conquest
At that moment The 3rd Egyptian army was in danger to be destroy and in Syria were Israel military moving toward the capital

I wonder under this gamble if soviet threaten unleash nuclear destruction on Israel
Would Kissinger reaction be: "sure you can, But Israel has the Nuke also and Allie with USA, we would strike back nuclear, oh by the way China* also..."
That would be a hell of Mexican standoff in History...


* in 1968 the Tensions between USSR and China went so bad that Soviets consider a Nuclear Attack on China following Invasion of red army.
only problem how would the USA react on that ?
So on diplomatic reception, the Soviet diplomate ask "hypothetic" question on "hypothetic" nuclear conflict between China and USSR
Henry Kissinger realize what going on answers firmly and loud "US would take Part of China and Strike back nuclear"
Soviet diplomate were shocked and Chinese diplomate were perplex about the response, What let to Nixon visit to China.

 

[SandroPertini98]

Actually Israel knew about Arab attack but underestimate it. And if Israel knew, US knew too, so Kissinger's "shock" was hypocrite.

"In the days leading up to the Yom Kippur War, Israeli intelligence could not conclusively determine that an attack was imminent. However, on October 5, 1973, Meir received official news that Syrian forces were massing on the Golan Heights. The prime minister was alarmed by the reports, and believed that the situation was similar to what preceded the Six-Day War. Her advisers, however, assured her not to worry, saying that they would have adequate notice before a war broke out. This made sense at the time; after the Six-Day War, most Israelis felt it unlikely that the Arabs would attack. Consequently, although the Knesset passed a resolution granting her power to demand a full-scale call-up of the military (instead of the typical cabinet decision), Meir did not mobilize Israel's forces early. Soon, though, the threat of war became very clear. Six hours before the outbreak of hostilities, Meir met with Minister of Defense Moshe Dayan and general David Elazar. While Dayan continued to argue that war was unlikely and favored calling up the air force and only two divisions, Elazar advocated full-scale army mobilization and the launch of a full-scale preemptive strike on Syrian forces.[54]

Meir approved full-scale mobilizing but sided with Dayan against a preemptive strike, citing Israel's need for foreign aid. She believed that Israel could not depend on European countries to supply Israel with military equipment, and the only country that might come to Israel's assistance was the United States. Fearing that the United States would be wary of intervening if Israel were perceived as initiating the hostilities, Meir decided on October 6 against a preemptive strike. She made it a priority to inform Washington of her decision. U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger later confirmed Meir's assessment by stating that if Israel had launched a preemptive strike, Israel would not have received "so much as a nail".[55][56]".