Sorry for the long headline, but if the Shah stays on the Peacock throne, would Iran be like Turkey until recently, or would it be only covert ties?
Would the Shah have supported Islamist militias in Lebanon? Did pre-Revolutionary Iran do things like that?
There would be others. Arafat was only one of many cadres that grew up with the Fedayeen.Ah, so if we *take care of* Arafat in some way or another, then the PLO can be nipped in the bud? Then there's no Palestinian-Israeli conflict as we know it today, because they won't have a unifying, untouchable leader.
The Civil war was a result of burgeoning Fatah corruption, much of it from Arafat in his attempts to stay in power by buying off the various warlords and lieutenants he had. Different leader might be less corrupt, removing the chances of a civil war.Hash: But he's the only one who can command cross-Palestinian unity between the Gazans, the West Bankers, the expats and all the divisions amongst those groups. Just look at Abbas right now. I'm 99.99% sure the civil war wouldn't have happened under Arafat.
Is the Iranian public overwhelmingly anti-Israel?It depend on the surviving Shan. If he is in an strong position, he may have room to play any way he likes. If he is in a weak position and lack popularity., he may have to play the "populist card" and be more anti-Israeli.
Is the Iranian public overwhelmingly anti-Israel?