A smaller Lebanon (and thus a larger Syria) is created after the end of WWI

Deleted member 97083

We won the war for independence (the war of 1948) and got the 1949 borders. The most I can see is in an absolute Israeli wank in which Israel annex southern Lebanon till the Litany river if we mange to conquer it. If Lebanon never had the south then Israel got a better claim to it, as it is traditionally considered the northern border of the land of Israel. If this happens then yes, Lebanon will surly seek an alliance with israel in order to be saved from syria, now the israel and Lebanon have a common border.
Annexing southern Lebanon is a great way to look like an expansionist in the first year of independence, which is bad for any newly independent country. Creating an independent Lebanon immediately establishes a longterm ally, while saying "hey, we gave up Southern Lebanon... so don't we get all of Palestine?"
 
Annexing southern Lebanon is a great way to look like an expansionist in the first year of independence, which is bad for any newly independent country. Creating an independent Lebanon immediately establishes a longterm ally, while saying "hey, we gave up Southern Lebanon... so don't we get all of Palestine?"
Well for this you need a friendly Lebanon from the start which is not a given. Lebanon OTL was Christian ruled in 1948, was worried about syria, and still declared war on israel and invaded (rather pathetically) northern israel. And I said this is a wank scenario ,not the most likely thing to happen, which is a Syrian annexations , in my opinion.
 
Top