Persia and Afghanistan

Two PoDs:
1 - Afghanistan: Mohammed Daoud Khan's coup failed in 1973 and Mohammed Sahir Schah remains King of Afghanistan until his death in 2007.
2 - Persia: Khomeini died in his exile in France.

How will that change the Middle East?
 
1) You would probably not see a Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and there would not be a break up of the country and the chaos caused by the insurgency of soviet occupation.
2) The Death of Khomeini in exile would probably mean that the Shah has a greater chance at surival. It would also mean that Moderate Clerc's stand a greater chance of taking control.
 
1) You would probably not see a Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and there would not be a break up of the country and the chaos caused by the insurgency of soviet occupation.
True.
2) The Death of Khomeini in exile would probably mean that the Shah has a greater chance at surival. It would also mean that Moderate Clerc's stand a greater chance of taking control.
None of the other clerics had his charisma. So I really doubt that they will take control of the situation and get their revenge (for the White Revolution that removed them from power).
 
By control I meant that the religious movement would not be in the hands of the radicals and thus there could be a chance for a compromise. I an still of the belief that the Shah would retain power.
As for the Middle East there would be less radicalization. Osama would just be the son of a rich Saudi family. Sadam Huessien would never have tried to invade either one of his neighbors. Lebaneon might very well have returned to becoming a peaceful state without a Shite group attempting to be the power within. Syria would have collapsed without the aid from Iran. There might be a peaceful agreement in Palestine.
 
By control I meant that the religious movement would not be in the hands of the radicals and thus there could be a chance for a compromise. I an still of the belief that the Shah would retain power.
As for the Middle East there would be less radicalization. Osama would just be the son of a rich Saudi family. Sadam Huessien would never have tried to invade either one of his neighbors. Lebaneon might very well have returned to becoming a peaceful state without a Shite group attempting to be the power within. Syria would have collapsed without the aid from Iran. There might be a peaceful agreement in Palestine.

Yes ... but (isn't "if-history" always like that?) ... the broad structural problems the Arab world have had in dealing with modernity will still be there. The Ikwahan doesn't necessarily wither and die. The Indo-Pak conflict doesn't necessarily become less acute. Qadaffi doesn't necessarily become less crazy. The Soviets don't necessarily become more happy with Israel being a strong military ally of the US in the ME.

In other words, there are still many seeds of conflict in the region. But I agree: more stability in Afghanistan and no Iranian Revolution makes things much more likely to trend toward peaceful development ...
 
Top