Israel-USSR Alliance: American Butterflies

[John Fredrick Parker]

We've talked before about the prospect of Israel and the Soviet Union maintaining a close relationship during the Cold War; what I'd like to know is, with PoDs following 1948, what effect would this have on American foreign policy and American politics and culture? A particular point on the latter, would anti-semitism remain part of mainstream discussion? What else?

 

[katchen]

Has anyone read "The Roots of Radicalism" by Rothman & Lichter?
Rothman & Lichter engaged in social science research on early wave (early to mid 1960s) and late 1960s student radicals. What struck Rothman & Lichter was the pivotal role of deracinated American Jews in American liberalism and yes, at least early wave radicalism.
Much of the history of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s is a history of American Jews who had faced several generations of anti-semitism and discrimination making common cause with African-Americans to if not eliminate racial and religious bigotry outright, at least criminalize the outward forms of expression and action on such bigotry, such as discrimination in housing, education, employment, public accommodations and the right to marry. A communist, Warsaw Pact Israel (which is what my 5th cousin Golda Meir was working toward along with many others in the Israeli Government at the time) would likely have made progress on these fronts impossible and might well have caused such an upsurge of discrimination against American Jews that many American Jews would find it necessary to emigrate to yes, a communist, Israel. . Which would very likely be Israel's gain and America's scientific and cultural loss. And would also very likely set back the cause of African-American civil rights for several generations.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

If Civil Rights gets hurt this bad, that would send some dark ripples right back into the Cold War, as Third World nations have trouble allying with a less repentantly racist nation...

 

[Riain]

An Israel closely allied to the Soviet Union need not be communist, India wasn't nor were the Islamic mid east countries who had mountains of military hardware lavished upon them.

 

[Delta Force]

An Israel closely allied to the Soviet Union need not be communist, India wasn't nor were the Islamic mid east countries who had mountains of military hardware lavished upon them.

India and the Middle Eastern nations were at the very least socialist though (Arab nationalism in all its forms is socialist). India was also opposed to the PRC, so helping India relieved pressure on Siberia.

 

[The Ubbergeek]

Would bring interesting changes.

America end up pushing the Palestinians's rights?

And you forget the proverbial wild card - the PRC, who in the 60s became bitter adversaries to USSR. Would it play a role in the region?

 

[Delta Force]

America end up pushing the Palestinians's rights?

Perhaps. It's imaginable that Syria and Iraq could become major American allies in this scenario.

And you forget the proverbial wild card - the PRC, who in the 60s became bitter adversaries to USSR. Would it play a role in the region?

They would probably end up backing the Pakistanis. Until the early 1990s the PRC was actually an oil exporter, so they wouldn't have any need to get involved in the region. Historically they don't seem to have really played sides in the region. They sold arms to both sides in the Iran-Iraq War and several other Middle Eastern nations. Even strong American allies have purchased PRC military equipment. In the 1980s the Saudis purchased a few DF-3A ballistic missiles from the PRC, without nuclear warheads of course.

 

[The Ubbergeek]

Perhaps. It's imaginable that Syria and Iraq could become major American allies in this scenario.



They would probably end up backing the Pakistanis. Until the early 1990s the PRC was actually an oil exporter, so they wouldn't have any need to get involved in the region. Historically they don't seem to have really played sides in the region. They sold arms to both sides in the Iran-Iraq War and several other Middle Eastern nations. Even strong American allies have purchased PRC military equipment. In the 1980s the Saudis purchased a few DF-3A ballistic missiles from the PRC, without nuclear warheads of course.

Yeah, I can see some states as this backed by USA.

Would they play a (bigger) role in Iranian politics?

 

[Delta Force]

Would they play a (bigger) role in Iranian politics?

It would certainly make for an interesting Middle East. The Soviets are probably going to get Afghanistan into their sphere of influence one way or another, so the historical tensions with them are going to exist. With Turkey and Iran left as the West's only heavy hitters in the region the loss of one would be a disaster. If America still goes through with its late 1970s plans to try to weaken and rein in the Shah it will also come with a much stronger commitment to keep him (or one of his successors) on the throne.

The Middle East is also likely to remain nuclear free. Historically proliferation stopped with Israel because Turkey and Iran were allies of Israel and had no need for their own weapons. States hostile to Israel were either threatened with (or attacked with) strikes to halt their nuclear programs or offered incentives to leave them alone. The Soviets also never saw their Middle Eastern allies as being that useful (they kept losing badly). With Israel on one side and Turkey and Iran on another it gives each side an incentive to retain the balance of power. NATO doesn't want nuclear weapons on the Mediterranean and the Soviets don't want nuclear powers on their southern border.

 

[euromellows]

How early are we talking an Israel-USSR Alliance? If its at the inception of their independence then I struggle to predict how the Suez Crisis will play out - very very messy. The role of Britain and France will be greatly complicated.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

And you forget the proverbial wild card - the PRC, who in the 60s became bitter adversaries to USSR. Would it play a role in the region?

They would probably end up backing the Pakistanis.

Trying to imagine Nasser or the Syria cozying up to Chariman Mao... not quite seeing it. Though I can see an alliance with Pakistan -- though that could make the rebellion in East Pakistan... interesting.

The Middle East is also likely to remain nuclear free.

Well that's one plus at least -- considering how badly damaged the US is going to be from the ripple effects on Civil Rights...

How early are we talking an Israel-USSR Alliance? If its at the inception of their independence then I struggle to predict how the Suez Crisis will play out - very very messy.

Fairly early -- certainly before the Suez Crisis, which in turn may well be butterflied right out.

 

[Orville_third]

It depends on how the wars go. Depending on how the Six-Day war goes, we could see World War III- especially if the Liberty is attacked.

 

[Herzen's love-child]

It depends on how the wars go. Depending on how the Six-Day war goes, we could see World War III- especially if the Liberty is attacked.

You've not heard of the doctrine of proportionate response?
why would the Liberty incident necessarily escalate to WW3?
Plus butterflies...

 

[HeavyWeaponsGuy]

India and the Middle Eastern nations were at the very least socialist though (Arab nationalism in all its forms is socialist). India was also opposed to the PRC, so helping India relieved pressure on Siberia.

What?

What about the monarchies who revolted against the Ottomans and took their crowns after the dust settled as kings of various states in the Middle East?

What about the liberal, democratic Wafd Party that basically ended the period of direct rule in British Egypt?

What about Said Qutb and the early days of the Muslim Brotherhood?

What about Anwar Sadat and the turn away from Nasserist socialism to pro-Western capitalism?

Arab political and economic thought was and is extremely diverse. It runs the gamut from outright Marxists to Islamic fundamentalists and everywhere in-between.

 

[Dunning Kruger]

We need a new species of butterfly to address this. We can call it the clusterf$#k butterfly.

I seriously have a hard time mentally projecting this in any sensible way.

Nassar is cosy with US after Suez Crisis and USSR with Israel. Wait, does Suez Crisis happen? Would brits work with Israel when they are cozy with Soviets?

US already has ties with Iran and the coup happens anyway. So Iraq is naturally pushed toward Soviets and vice versa. Syria should go same way as Iraq I assume. Or not. How do Soviets mediate Arabs vs. Israelis? It seems to me the Soviets go with the highest bidder. Naval base in Med, with a regiment of troops on the ground gets full backing. Hmm. Boots on the ground that close to Saudi Arabia. Then again, I cant imagine Israel accepting Russian troops.

Wall Street and entertainment industry heavily populated by israeli sympathizers. So can the US really go negative toward Israel? US was largely neutral until 67 and 73 happened. But big difference between neutral and antagonistic.

My head is going to explode. Seriously, too many iterations without a chain of events to work with.

I think India's path, which kind of was Israel's original path, is the most likely alternative path. US decides not to go all in on Israel in 73. Israel survives but close ties are never established with the US.

 

[HeavyWeaponsGuy]

Wall Street and entertainment industry heavily populated by israeli sympathizers. So can the US really go negative toward Israel? US was largely neutral until 67 and 73 happened. But big difference between neutral and antagonistic.

While there will certainly be American Jews who support the State of Israel no matter what color its politics go, I also think there will be a significant split in the American Jewish community over something like this: American Jews are a different group than the population of Israel, and they come from a society where socialism is more of a dirty word than it is in Israel, or even other parts of Western Europe and NATO-aligned countries.

There's undoubtedly going to be pressure from mainstream society for Israel to be re-imagined as the leftist boogeyman (this may even be accompanied to a comparative reevaluation of the Arabs), but there will also be American Jews who feel that Israel has completely departed from the ideals on which it was founded (one need only look at Theodore Herzl and other early Zionists to see what's wrong with this idea) and will, in an ideological sense, leave Israel to its fate. There probably won't be anywhere near as much cultural exchange or emigration of American Jews to Israel (especially because if the Soviets got Israel in their corner they would probably drastically loosen the restrictions on emigration by Soviet Jews) and the United States will likely possess the largest Jewish population for years to come.

 

[Delta Force]

What?

What about the monarchies who revolted against the Ottomans and took their crowns after the dust settled as kings of various states in the Middle East?

What about the liberal, democratic Wafd Party that basically ended the period of direct rule in British Egypt?

Arab nationalism did exist then, but it was more of an anti-Ottoman independence movement. Interestingly the Wafd Party and other earlier Egyptian groups were more Egyptian nationalist than Arab nationalist.

What about Said Qutb and the early days of the Muslim Brotherhood?

The Muslim Brotherhood is really more Islamic nationalist than Arab nationalist.

What about Anwar Sadat and the turn away from Nasserist socialism to pro-Western capitalism?

That's akin to Deng Xiaoping in the PRC, occasionally countries have radical reforms.

Arab political and economic thought was and is extremely diverse. It runs the gamut from outright Marxists to Islamic fundamentalists and everywhere in-between.

The Arab nationalists and pan-Arabists of the Cold War period were usually more influenced more by anti-imperialism, socialism, and Marxism than Islam. Islam was still important, but most leaders and political parties were secular.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

So can the US really go negative toward Israel? US was largely neutral until 67 and 73 happened. But big difference between neutral and antagonistic.

That would be a much better path for the US domestically, and it may be more plausible than anti-semitism staying mainstream. But wouldn't this mean that American mideast policy is essentially unaffected until the 70's?

 

[Minchandre]

First, I think that a USSR-leaning Israel, whether outright Communist (very likely, by the way, in such a scenario) or simply socialist, would definitely involve almost all the Arab countries going to the US, if only by default. Which may delay or outright prevent the nationalization of the Suez Canal - after all, whatever probably-military dictatorship takes over in Egypt won't possibly be socialist-leaning, and so they'll be much less likely to nationalize anything, though we may see the UK leaned upon heavily to sell the Canal at a ridiculously low price to an Egyptian company or government. With US-backed Syria right there, Lebanon may be less enthusiastic about inviting in the Marines when their religious conflict inevitably reaches a hard boil, though what comes next is hard to say - bloody civil war in the 50s? Syrian annexation, in part or in whole? Soviet/American proxy war in Lebanon, by way of Israel and Syria? Certainly the coolest possibility is a militantly atheist Communist regime, but I'm not sure where such a thing could come from, except by way of de facto Soviet/Israeli occupation.

Domestically, American Jews will tread much more lightly. As previously mentioned, American Jews were incredibly involved with the Civil Rights movement, as well as being highly involved in all of the shades of the American Left, from Democrats to the Communist Party of the USA. With a Communist Israel, all American Jews will be under suspicion from the FBI, even the ones that openly revile the horribly misled state. It might lead to an even leftier Jewish population, actually, as Communist Israel starts emphasizing the Socialist currents in recent Jewish thought and tries to unify Jewish culture and Communism. This, in turn, may hurt Jewish assimilation - after all, these weird Commies are seeming less and less like civilized white folk by the day, no matter the color of their skin. Antisemitism will probably be more socially acceptable, especially amongst the rabid nationalist anti-Commie crowd (in fact, anti-Jewish slurs may be generalized to Communists in general). While I don't think that Jews will ever come to be regarded as a Fifth Column (no matter how much the Mossad actually does end up recruiting them...), they may end up receiving the same kind of suspicion from "the Establishment" that blacks often did in the 60s and 70s.

A related, equally interesting question: what effect does this have on Jews in the Warsaw Pact, of which there are also quite a few?

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

Ok, I'm leaning back toward the darker domestic picture; does anyone have thoughts as to what effects a more antisemitic and slower to integrate US would have on the Cold War?