The details of a Palestine partition plan in a no/much smaller Holocaust scenario?

The jews won't return to europe after a shorter ww2. It is simply asb, and would require first for israel to lose, which is actually not that simple after the arab revolt is crushed. If we forget for a moment that the germans, pols and what not will not want them back and that they already lost all their possessions in their home countries , will you come back to a country after you saw all your friends and neighbors turn against you and start calling for your death?
 
Ahab has hit the nail on the head. Most people, and especially those in countries occupied by the Germans during WWII and their allies, want to forget that the Holocaust was not carried out by the SS and Gestapo alone (and of course the Wehrmacht). The majority of the locals in most occupied countries, Denmark being the most obvious and complete exception, were at best indifferent to the fate of the Jews and in many, many cases willing assistants to the Germans in locating Jews to be deported. Antisemitism was very real and very widespread. This is not just the various paramilitary units in the Baltics, Ukraine and elsewhere who were active in hunting and executing Jews. It includes "friends" and neighbors who eagerly took jobs vacated by Jews forced out by new laws, who occupied the houses and businesses of deported Jews, or who bled Jews dry to hide them until they were broke and then turned them over to the Nazis. yes there were many who risked much to hide or assist Jews, but they were a small minority.

OTL in many places Jews who survived were attacked when they returned home and attempted to recover property like businesses or homes. These claims continue to this day, still not settled over 70 years after the end of the war. ITTL the same thing will happen - would you want to return if your house was now occupied by one of your former neighbors who would not relinquish it. Would you want yo live in a town where the inhabitants helped point out the Jews to the Nazis? Yes,some will return but most will decide to move on.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
The jews won't return to europe after a shorter ww2. It is simply asb, and would require first for israel to lose, which is actually not that simple after the arab revolt is crushed. If we forget for a moment that the germans, pols and what not will not want them back and that they already lost all their possessions in their home countries , will you come back to a country after you saw all your friends and neighbors turn against you and start calling for your death?

Ahab has hit the nail on the head. Most people, and especially those in countries occupied by the Germans during WWII and their allies, want to forget that the Holocaust was not carried out by the SS and Gestapo alone (and of course the Wehrmacht). The majority of the locals in most occupied countries, Denmark being the most obvious and complete exception, were at best indifferent to the fate of the Jews and in many, many cases willing assistants to the Germans in locating Jews to be deported. Antisemitism was very real and very widespread. This is not just the various paramilitary units in the Baltics, Ukraine and elsewhere who were active in hunting and executing Jews. It includes "friends" and neighbors who eagerly took jobs vacated by Jews forced out by new laws, who occupied the houses and businesses of deported Jews, or who bled Jews dry to hide them until they were broke and then turned them over to the Nazis. yes there were many who risked much to hide or assist Jews, but they were a small minority.

OTL in many places Jews who survived were attacked when they returned home and attempted to recover property like businesses or homes. These claims continue to this day, still not settled over 70 years after the end of the war. ITTL the same thing will happen - would you want to return if your house was now occupied by one of your former neighbors who would not relinquish it. Would you want yo live in a town where the inhabitants helped point out the Jews to the Nazis? Yes,some will return but most will decide to move on.
Completely agreed with everything in both posts here.
 
Working from a no holocaust premise, likely a scenario without Hitler and the Nazis or a brief flirtation at most, then I am not convinced we get an Israel. Mandatory Palestine had about 750,000 people around 1920 and Transjordan about 220,000, mostly Muslim. The Jewish population in Palestine was around 11% and Christians around 10%. Even with heightened anti-Semitism in Europe, but far short of that pursued by the Nazis, the bulk of Europe's Jewish population was not emigrating to Palestine, only the Zionists were pulling hard for that, to the extent they left most Jewish people were trying to go to the USA and other more developed countries. the Yidddish communities outnumbered the Zionists and show little draw to leave Europe for the desert. So here we cannot rest on events from 1933 to 1945 and post-1945.

My argument would be that the Zionists continue to buy land and encourage settlement, they get a certain sympathy and support but not much more in real feet on the ground. The British were knotted over the conflicting promise to establish a Jewish homeland and to support an Arab state, while not wholesale screwing the local population of Muslims we now call Palestinians. As we know the British supported a Jewish homeland but discourages emigration, it uses the Jewish populace to keep the Muslims in line yet soon finds itself the enemy of both. That legacy remains but I am not convinced it forces the same antagonisms that the 1948 War cemented. Transjordan became the Arab state. And here I think the Jewish population never gets big enough to actually show statehood is viable, thus the British are more likely to put Palestine under the new Jordanian Kingdom with guarantees for the non-Muslim population, a base agreement and withdraw. Jordan needs British aid to keep the Arab tribes from Saudi Arabia from raiding them so the British linger here like they did in the Gulf until East of Suez finishes that commitment.

Here you see a Jewish community living mostly in the cities with some farming communities spread out. Definitely a Moslem majority, likely around 80%, but with the populace better mixed and living with usual tensions but unless we see a force to promote Islamic supremacy and violence upon non-believers, after all modern Israel includes a sizable populace of non-Jewish and not mainstream Islamic peoples like the Druze, a few more get added from Jordan, it looks like modern Jordan, only slightly wealthier and more cosmopolitan. If it can get a working democracy under the King then one might get a rather successful state but not a Jewish State as we now know.
 
I agree that the majority of the European Jews are urbanized, with a significant rural minority. Sure they might prefer to go to Western Europe or North America (Canada or USA). I cannot emphasize enough that NOBODY in these places is going to be willing to take anywhere near the number of Jews that want to emigrate. Aside from the antisemitism, another reason a lot of these folks won't be welcome is, as a group, they are pretty poor. Anyone coming from where the Nazis held sway for any time have had their properties confiscated, bank accounts taken, jewelry confiscated etc. Their home countries are either unwilling or unable (or both) to try and restore assets. So in the early 1940s you have lots of Jews, mostly not very well set financially, from Central and Eastern Europe looking for someplace to go.

OTL a large number of the Holocaust survivors who went to Israel would have gone to the USA IF given the opportunity. The reality was there were not allowed in in large numbers. I have explained in previous posts why the USA put huge pressure on Latin American countries not to allow Jews in. ITTL without the horrors of the Holocaust with the industrial killing of the death camps, what has happened to Jews is in line with historical events, not a completely new event requiring the coining of a new word - genocide. If the travails of the Jews 1933-39 in Germany, and the Holocaust did not move the Europeans and Americans to open the doors more than a crack, I would not expect the scenario here to make a difference.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Working from a no holocaust premise, likely a scenario without Hitler and the Nazis or a brief flirtation at most, then I am not convinced we get an Israel. Mandatory Palestine had about 750,000 people around 1920 and Transjordan about 220,000, mostly Muslim. The Jewish population in Palestine was around 11% and Christians around 10%. Even with heightened anti-Semitism in Europe, but far short of that pursued by the Nazis, the bulk of Europe's Jewish population was not emigrating to Palestine, only the Zionists were pulling hard for that, to the extent they left most Jewish people were trying to go to the USA and other more developed countries. the Yidddish communities outnumbered the Zionists and show little draw to leave Europe for the desert. So here we cannot rest on events from 1933 to 1945 and post-1945.

Agreed; however, what if the Nazis come to power but get overthrown after a quick WWII?

My argument would be that the Zionists continue to buy land and encourage settlement, they get a certain sympathy and support but not much more in real feet on the ground. The British were knotted over the conflicting promise to establish a Jewish homeland and to support an Arab state, while not wholesale screwing the local population of Muslims we now call Palestinians. As we know the British supported a Jewish homeland but discourages emigration, it uses the Jewish populace to keep the Muslims in line yet soon finds itself the enemy of both. That legacy remains but I am not convinced it forces the same antagonisms that the 1948 War cemented. Transjordan became the Arab state. And here I think the Jewish population never gets big enough to actually show statehood is viable, thus the British are more likely to put Palestine under the new Jordanian Kingdom with guarantees for the non-Muslim population, a base agreement and withdraw. Jordan needs British aid to keep the Arab tribes from Saudi Arabia from raiding them so the British linger here like they did in the Gulf until East of Suez finishes that commitment.

Here you see a Jewish community living mostly in the cities with some farming communities spread out. Definitely a Moslem majority, likely around 80%, but with the populace better mixed and living with usual tensions but unless we see a force to promote Islamic supremacy and violence upon non-believers, after all modern Israel includes a sizable populace of non-Jewish and not mainstream Islamic peoples like the Druze, a few more get added from Jordan, it looks like modern Jordan, only slightly wealthier and more cosmopolitan. If it can get a working democracy under the King then one might get a rather successful state but not a Jewish State as we now know.

Frankly, all of this sounds very sensible for a no-Holocaust scenario! :)

Also, though, what about a TL where the Holocaust occurs but is much smaller than it was in our TL?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
I agree that the majority of the European Jews are urbanized, with a significant rural minority. Sure they might prefer to go to Western Europe or North America (Canada or USA). I cannot emphasize enough that NOBODY in these places is going to be willing to take anywhere near the number of Jews that want to emigrate. Aside from the antisemitism, another reason a lot of these folks won't be welcome is, as a group, they are pretty poor. Anyone coming from where the Nazis held sway for any time have had their properties confiscated, bank accounts taken, jewelry confiscated etc. Their home countries are either unwilling or unable (or both) to try and restore assets. So in the early 1940s you have lots of Jews, mostly not very well set financially, from Central and Eastern Europe looking for someplace to go.

OTL a large number of the Holocaust survivors who went to Israel would have gone to the USA IF given the opportunity. The reality was there were not allowed in in large numbers. I have explained in previous posts why the USA put huge pressure on Latin American countries not to allow Jews in. ITTL without the horrors of the Holocaust with the industrial killing of the death camps, what has happened to Jews is in line with historical events, not a completely new event requiring the coining of a new word - genocide. If the travails of the Jews 1933-39 in Germany, and the Holocaust did not move the Europeans and Americans to open the doors more than a crack, I would not expect the scenario here to make a difference.
Excellent points; indeed, completely agreed with all of this. :)
 
Two scenarios are posited 1) smaller attempt at genocide 2) Nazis fail before a plan can be implemented. In either case I think there would still be an Israel but it may take another twenty years. If WW2 is shorter and less catastrophic to the British Empire, then the British will either not be as overstretched or not feel to be as overstretched. Thus the mandate would last longer. In case one there would be a greater surge of European Emigration as the smaller genocide would make clear to a many Jews that Europe was no longer their home as eloquently posted elsewhere. In case two there would likely be more Jews leaving Europe but not in a massive wave. I would expect as we are seeing today, a number of parties would arise in the wake of the Nazi defeat spouting similar ideas with different euphemisms. While not in immediate danger, I would expect a large number of Jews to ask themselves why wait for these thugs to come to power like the Nazis. Given the doors slammed shut elsewhere, they will be funneled to the Mandate. If enough come, and their former countries refuse to take them back, the British have the choice between making Palestine or Cypress the Jewish National home.

On another note. The Jews who come are more likely to align with the Revisionist movement. Jabotinsky did predict a great catastrophe about to engulf Europe's Jews. Those that leave Europe will probably be more receptive to his program.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Two scenarios are posited 1) smaller attempt at genocide 2) Nazis fail before a plan can be implemented. In either case I think there would still be an Israel but it may take another twenty years. If WW2 is shorter and less catastrophic to the British Empire, then the British will either not be as overstretched or not feel to be as overstretched. Thus the mandate would last longer. In case one there would be a greater surge of European Emigration as the smaller genocide would make clear to a many Jews that Europe was no longer their home as eloquently posted elsewhere. In case two there would likely be more Jews leaving Europe but not in a massive wave. I would expect as we are seeing today, a number of parties would arise in the wake of the Nazi defeat spouting similar ideas with different euphemisms. While not in immediate danger, I would expect a large number of Jews to ask themselves why wait for these thugs to come to power like the Nazis. Given the doors slammed shut elsewhere, they will be funneled to the Mandate. If enough come, and their former countries refuse to take them back, the British have the choice between making Palestine or Cypress the Jewish National home.

On another note. The Jews who come are more likely to align with the Revisionist movement. Jabotinsky did predict a great catastrophe about to engulf Europe's Jews. Those that leave Europe will probably be more receptive to his program.
What exactly did the Revisionist Movement advocate?

Also, does the League of Nations experience/get a shot in the arm after the end of this TL's WWII?
 
What exactly did the Revisionist Movement advocate?
The revisionist movement is a bit more militaristic and takes it's inspiration from Garibaldi not Marx. Jabotinsky thought it ludicrous that the Arabs would want to live under Jewish sovereignty and thus a very strong army would be needed. He advocated a less socialist economic policy. It's a question as to whether they would have settled for partition. Some of their early manifestos include the East Bank of the Jordan river as claimed territory. Jabotinsky's writings make it clear that he would accept a non-Jewish minority so long as they accepted that the dominant culture was Jewish. what that means in practice could be anything from simple pluralism to Apartheid depending on the person doing the interpreting of his will. Begin was more the former, Shamir and the Lehi crew are probably the latter.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
The revisionist movement is a bit more militaristic and takes it's inspiration from Garibaldi not Marx. Jabotinsky thought it ludicrous that the Arabs would want to live under Jewish sovereignty and thus a very strong army would be needed. He advocated a less socialist economic policy. It's a question as to whether they would have settled for partition. Some of their early manifestos include the East Bank of the Jordan river as claimed territory. Jabotinsky's writings make it clear that he would accept a non-Jewish minority so long as they accepted that the dominant culture was Jewish. what that means in practice could be anything from simple pluralism to Apartheid depending on the person doing the interpreting of his will. Begin was more the former, Shamir and the Lehi crew are probably the latter.
Thanks for this information! :)

Also, though, wouldn't even Revisionists be smart enough to accept Partition as a tactical necessity?
 
Last edited:
Agreed; however, what if the Nazis come to power but get overthrown after a quick WWII?

Frankly, all of this sounds very sensible for a no-Holocaust scenario! :)

Also, though, what about a TL where the Holocaust occurs but is much smaller than it was in our TL?

Assuming a virulent anti-sematic Germany, or in another alternative where Hitler gets power in a crumbling or crumbled Austro-Hungary (or rump Austria), to the level of Pogroms like we saw in pre-war Russia, post-war Poland or Romania then you still get strong emigration Westward, as much as possible towards USA, UK, France and even Germany (surviving Kaiserreich or alt-Weimar). If organized persecution and beginnings of extermination as happened with the Aktion T4 extending into the Jewish and other populations then I am uncertain. Given the real foot dragging other countries showed OTL even with full on Holocaust, I would argue a future Israel is still not certain, a Jewish homeland is in British hands and they were all but coherent in their policy or its implementation, they wanted their cake and eat it too in Palestine. Sadly anything short of the wholesale extermination of millions weakens the resolve to do much more than hand wringing and finger pointing by the Allies, hauntingly the Genocide of the Armenians past into history and that of the Jews of Europe has almost the same potential. To date we still view it only as to the Jewish victims and rarely talk of the Romani, the Homosexuals, the dissidents, and so many more who also perished.

And in my musings on an alternative history where we have no Hitler and no Holocaust I am tending to believe that racism, antisemitism, intolerance generally remains on a low background boil in Europe and North America. It is something I am trying to take sober note of as I ponder the alternatives.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Assuming a virulent anti-sematic Germany, or in another alternative where Hitler gets power in a crumbling or crumbled Austro-Hungary (or rump Austria), to the level of Pogroms like we saw in pre-war Russia, post-war Poland or Romania then you still get strong emigration Westward, as much as possible towards USA, UK, France and even Germany (surviving Kaiserreich or alt-Weimar). If organized persecution and beginnings of extermination as happened with the Aktion T4 extending into the Jewish and other populations then I am uncertain. Given the real foot dragging other countries showed OTL even with full on Holocaust, I would argue a future Israel is still not certain, a Jewish homeland is in British hands and they were all but coherent in their policy or its implementation, they wanted their cake and eat it too in Palestine.

Who wanted to both have their cake and eat it? The Zionists? The British?

Sadly anything short of the wholesale extermination of millions weakens the resolve to do much more than hand wringing and finger pointing by the Allies, hauntingly the Genocide of the Armenians past into history and that of the Jews of Europe has almost the same potential. To date we still view it only as to the Jewish victims and rarely talk of the Romani, the Homosexuals, the dissidents, and so many more who also perished.

The Zionists can still launch an insurgency in Palestine even without international support for a Jewish state in Palestine, though.

And in my musings on an alternative history where we have no Hitler and no Holocaust I am tending to believe that racism, antisemitism, intolerance generally remains on a low background boil in Europe and North America. It is something I am trying to take sober note of as I ponder the alternatives.

Agreed. :(
 
Thanks for this information! :)

Also, though, wouldn't even Revisionists be smart enough to accept Partition as a tactical necessity?
If Begin is leader possibly.The Yishuv had the the role of accepting partition or not, thus the key question is how would a more influential revisionist movement affect the socialist Yishuv. Do they try to co-opt parts of their platform or try to ostracize them as in OTL.
 
And in my musings on an alternative history where we have no Hitler and no Holocaust I am tending to believe that racism, antisemitism, intolerance generally remains on a low background boil in Europe and North America. It is something I am trying to take sober note of as I ponder the alternatives.

I respectfully disagree with this. These tendencies were on the rise in Europe (and the USA) long before the Nazis came to power or occupied much of Europe. As a reaction to the excesses of the Nazis in things like the T4 program, let alone the Holocaust, antisemitism, anti-Slav and Roma racism (but not racism against Asians or Africans) became unfashionable. More precisely what became unfashionable was the sort of blatant antisemitism you had in Germany and the "KKK style" antisemitism. restrictions on where Jews could live, quotas in Universities and professional schools, refusal to hire or promote Jews and more lasted in the USA until the 1960s quite openly. Absent the "shaming" of the Holocaust I don't see this getting any better at all.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
If Begin is leader possibly.The Yishuv had the the role of accepting partition or not, thus the key question is how would a more influential revisionist movement affect the socialist Yishuv. Do they try to co-opt parts of their platform or try to ostracize them as in OTL.
So, was Begin a moderate within the Revisionist Movement?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
I respectfully disagree with this. These tendencies were on the rise in Europe (and the USA) long before the Nazis came to power or occupied much of Europe. As a reaction to the excesses of the Nazis in things like the T4 program, let alone the Holocaust, antisemitism, anti-Slav and Roma racism (but not racism against Asians or Africans) became unfashionable. More precisely what became unfashionable was the sort of blatant antisemitism you had in Germany and the "KKK style" antisemitism. restrictions on where Jews could live, quotas in Universities and professional schools, refusal to hire or promote Jews and more lasted in the USA until the 1960s quite openly. Absent the "shaming" of the Holocaust I don't see this getting any better at all.
Completely agreed; plus, even civil rights for African Americans might take longer to be put into place in the Southern U.S. in this TL! :(
 
Top