PC/WI: Israeli state in the Mid-East by 1800?

WILDGEESE

Gone Fishin'
Has the name of the post suggests.

Get the Jews to have their own homeland in the Middle East by 1800.

This can be done by any means possible, such as a European country backing its formation via conflict with the Ottoman Empire etc.

Regards filers.
 
A bit early for Europeans to get needed forces over there. They were still paying off the Barbary Corsairs at that point. And everyone was fighting one another. And the Europeans might see it as more of a crusade. Jews would not be at the top of the list of people they support.
 
Has the name of the post suggests.

Get the Jews to have their own homeland in the Middle East by 1800.

This can be done by any means possible, such as a European country backing its formation via conflict with the Ottoman Empire etc.

Regards filers.

OK, let me throw this out: Is it @all possible
that Russia would support a plan to put its
Jews where Israel is today?
 
A long time ago, in a forum far, far away, I considered the possibility that if Fakhr-al-Din II's Druze rebellion of the early 17th century had instead broken out in the 1560s under his father, Joseph Nasi might have secured permission from the Sultan to put it down and used that as a catalyst for his OTL plan to settle Jews in the Galilee. This wouldn't be a state as such, but might be an Ottoman fiefdom dominated by a Jewish dynasty in the mold of Lebanon under the Shihabs.
 
Different Ottoman-Mameluke-Safavid dynamics lead to see-saw war and depopulation of Southern Syria BEFORE the expulsion form Spain (as occured 300 years earlier during the Mongol invasion and the crusades) in the late 1400s.

Whoever is in control of Southern SYria when the dust settles is still facing a regional rival at the end of it (not impossible- while the Safavids were originally curbstomped by superior Ottoman technology and millitary doctrine they adapted and then held their own. If the Mamelukes avoid being conquered in the first clash they too can modernize) and needs to resettle the Levant- FAST, in order to support their forward base. Iberian Jews are actively courted (as occured to a lesser degree OTL) and are actively armed to resist the rival Empire while than being kept disarmed and vulnerable (which would, I suppose, mean the Ottomans hold the Levant- they were more flexible about such things).

Jews become demographic majority and one of their notables rule a semi-independent fief much like the Druze emirate in Lebanon.

When a Napoleon equivalent, or possibly an Muhamad Ali equivalent challenges the porte, the Jewish fief is made independent (or makes itself independent) in the post war settlement.
 
Not sure if it is possible by 1800.

Perhaps an interesting POD would be early immigration to the Ottoman-ruled land of Israel from the 1780s Hasidim to the Perushim (aka the disciples of the Vilna Gaon) in 1808-1812 onwards, manages to inspire most religious Jews to soon follow suit from around 1820-1880 instead of staying put in Europe and the Islamic World as in OTL.

Which would mean the ATL Zionist leadership would not be dominated by secular socialist-leaning Jewish immigrants, who came later on in the Second Wave between 1904-1914 and subsequently assumed the mantle of leadership.
 
Not sure if it is possible by 1800.

Perhaps an interesting POD would be early immigration to the Ottoman-ruled land of Israel from the 1780s Hasidim to the Perushim (aka the disciples of the Vilna Gaon) in 1808-1812 onwards, manages to inspire most religious Jews to soon follow suit from around 1820-1880 instead of staying put in Europe and the Islamic World as in OTL.

Which would mean the ATL Zionist leadership would not be dominated by secular socialist-leaning Jewish immigrants, who came later on in the Second Wave between 1904-1914 and subsequently assumed the mantle of leadership.

Do you see such a leadership change possibly butterflying away the subsequent
Arab- Israeli conflict?
 
A long time ago, in a forum far, far away, I considered the possibility that if Fakhr-al-Din II's Druze rebellion of the early 17th century had instead broken out in the 1560s under his father, Joseph Nasi might have secured permission from the Sultan to put it down and used that as a catalyst for his OTL plan to settle Jews in the Galilee. This wouldn't be a state as such, but might be an Ottoman fiefdom dominated by a Jewish dynasty in the mold of Lebanon under the Shihabs.
That is most certainly a good POD for a timeline.
 
Do you see such a leadership change possibly butterflying away the subsequent
Arab- Israeli conflict?

IMHO it is doubtful, such a scenario would likely boost the religious Zionist movement on the basis that ATL mass religious Jewish immigration would be motivated by a messianic impulse if the following link is anything to go by. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hastening_Redemption

At the same time is it possible that later on, a fairly significant Anti-Zionist Haredi contingent among the religious Jewish immigrants would probably offer more support to the likes of Jacob Israel de Haan to cooperate with Arab leaders though it would be interesting to see how the ATL Zionist leadership deals with the challenge of de Haan compared to the secular Zionists in OTL. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Israël_de_Haan
 
If you can improve the power/wealth of the Jews within the Ottoman Empire, then I think it'd be possible for a Sultan in a particularly dire position to spin off a tributary state in Palestine under Jewish leadership in exchange for serious financial assistance. Still subservient to the Ottomans(at first), but essentially dominated by a local dynasty, along the lines of other local elites under the Ottomans throughout the Middle East. The extent of autonomy this province would have would vary, but domination of the area by Jews would encourage other Jews to immigrate, strengthening the position of this state vis-a-vis local Muslims and Christians as well as the Ottoman state. This province could break away or secure a large amount of autonomy for itself in the future to the point of being a state within a state, but on the flipside, more influential Jews in positions of power in the OE would likely make them (even more) invested in the survival and prospering of the Empire as IOTL. The problem however, would be getting said Jews that would be able to bankroll the Empire through a particularly bad stretch to want control of Palestine. Simply put, the area wasn't worth all that much, and you need Zionism in order to have Jews invest in the idea of a Jewish state in Palestine. I'd sooner bet on a Jewish suzerain of Salonika or Bursa pre-Zionism than I would Palestine.
 
Top