AHC/WI: Jordan doesn't join the Six-Day War?

My understanding is that Jordan was not all that enthusiastic about entering the Six-Day War. Let's say either Israel works out a non-agression pact with Jordan, possible with some territorial concessions(if plausible) or King Hussein just doesn't believe what Nasser is saying about his success. How does this affect Israel's relations with Jordan(maybe there's actual Israeli access to the Western Wall and the Jewish Quarter) and how does this affect Israeli domestic politics since it probably butteflies the acquisition of the West Bank?
 
This is an interesting P.O.D., Israel gains control over the Palestinian population of Gaza but there is no Biblical sites in Gaza, so it is much easier for Israel to give it up as they did OTL. So there would be no settler movement. Would there be a peace agreement with the PLO in Gaza? The West Bank would still be under Jordan's control.
 
If Jordan would agree to a divided Jerusalem, maybe with internationalization of the Temple Mount this could fly. Of course, since the West Bank would still be part of the sovereign nation of Jordan, the JORDANIANS will need to keep a very tight lid on terrorism/assaults on Israel from THEIR territory or end up paying the price. And, btw don't expect the Jordanians to give the West Bank to Arafat or in any way set up an independent Palestinian state (which they could have done any time from 1948 on). While the Israelis may be quicker to return Gaza to Egypt for a peace treaty (which Nasser is unlikely to give them no matter what) they may retain more a presence in the Sinai, down the coastal strip to Sharm el Sheikh and possibly the Sinai oil fields...
 
I think that this is also an interesting PoD. I think that the war likely doesn't go much differently, although the Israelis might make more headway into Syria without the distraction of a Jordanian front. I think the most immediate butterfly will be significant hostility from the other Arab states, particularly Egypt, Syria and Iraq, towards the Jordanian monarchy. I think this could lead to diplomatic recognition of Israel by Jordan and a "treaty of friendship", as well as a de-facto alliance between the two states. Jordan will need Israel's powerful military and American connections for protection, and Jordan will provide Israel with diplomatic cover in the Arab world and with good strategic depth. I expect some sort of agreement to open up Jerusalem to a Jewish presence will occur.

In the somewhat longer term however, I think the hostility of the Arab nations will be very important. If the PLO still revolt in an alt-Black September, I would be interested to see whether or not Salah Jadid in Syria has the political clout to intervene on the side of the PLO. If that happens, especially with a much larger Palestinian population under Jordanian rule and thus a larger revolt, Jordan might cease to exist and instead become the "Arab Republic of Greater Palestine" or something. Then things get very hairy.
 

Deleted member 9338

If the initial attack schedule is not change, air attacks and the assault on Gaza and the Sinai and there is no assault on the West Bank or Jerusalem I wonder if there would be an assault on the Golan.

The attacks on Syria came at the tail end of the conflict and only after the Syrians continued to launch artillery attacks on the settlements.

Its is possible that June 5-8 attacks on Gaza and the Sinai, June 6-7 Jerusalem only, June 8 the Syrians seeing news reports stop the attacks and the IDF does not take the Golan.

Nasser’s position is now weaker as he has lost the most.
 

Yonatan

Banned
Interesting question.

with more forces to use against Syria, you might very well see a 5-4 day war instead of 6. the assault into Syria only started in the last couple of days. this way it can start on day 3, as soon as the main Egyptian line collapses.

The issue of Jerusalem will still be a problem. Jordan isnt just going to give Jews access to the temple mount, and any peace deal will still only happen in the relative far future (decades). what role will Jordan play all this time? it didnt intervene in the 1973 war, so if they do the same in 1967 how does that change their policy? they will get alot of flak for this from the arab world.

Of course, without the capture of Jerusalem and the WB the settlement movment as we know it will not exist. you still get small settlement in the Sinai, however they will likely wont be very large and will be removed as soon as a peace deal can be reached following an alternate 1973 war (assuming there is one, there probably will be however. maybe not in 1973, but during the 70's Egypt will get new toys from the USSR and will eventually be able to fight Israel on a slightly more even footing. also as soon as Sadat comes to power or a similar person, you at least have the chance of a peace deal with him. it was the grand victory of 1967 that convinced the Israeli leadership they were invincible and thus had little reason to negotiate.).

There is also the issue of water of course, and the fact that without a peace deal Israel will still be nervous about Jordan (since it can easily strike and cut Israel in 2 in any future war). without the OTL natural border of the Jordan river and the strategic locations around it, the IDF will develop differently in order to counter a possible Jordanian assault (as unlikely as it is).
 
part of the reason Jordan entered the war was because of the demands on the people there. A kind of 'war fever' gripped the Arab states around Israel, and Hussein could hardly ignore it. If he had refused to enter the war, he would likely have to deal with a huge amount of unrest, if not outright rebellion. And after the war, there would likely be a lot of angry speculation that the Arabs could have won the war if Jordan had entered it. And there is still going to be trouble between Israel and Jordan, due to irregular attacks from the West Bank into Israel (IIRC, Israel had already launched a few counterstrikes into the WB in retaliation). During the war too, wouldn't Israel have to maintain some military forces on the border with Jordan, just in case?
 
A quick scan of The Genocide says that initially the Israelis weren't planning on annexing the West Bank merely East Jerusalem, and that at one point they actually pulled their troops back and merely had them digging in to defend the Old City until they found out that the Jordanians had pulled back across the river. If the Jordanians decide to dig in on the West Bank rather than pull back to use the Jordan River as a defensive barrier might we perhaps see the Israelis annexing East Jerusalem yet Jordan keeping the West Bank? Or would they decide that the possibility of having Israel split in two by a solid thrust mean that they have to occupy it?
 

Deleted member 9338

[FONT=&quot]While I am unaware of the source you are taking you idea from, I find it hard to see the IDF pulling back after defeating the two Jordanian Armoured Brigades and their heavy artillery positions in the hills along the high lands. These artillery positions were firing on Israeli cities and it is difficult to believe that after taking this position the IDF pulls back.

It maybe more plausible for the IDF to only take East Jerusalem and leave the West Bank alone. This is only possible if Jordan does not attack out of the West Bank.[/FONT]
 
Top