United Arab Republic

Formed between Nasser's Egypt and Syria, it fell apart in the 60s (i think) due to Egyptian dominance, however Iraq was ready to join (hence the three stars formerly on its flag). What if a strong federal government with a more equal situation for the member states.

Could the UAR lasted for longer, would Saddam have been thrown off by a larger Baathist state or would he have risen to total power? A far more decisive Iraq-Iran War? Israel in a weaker position? Future member states (Libya attempted a similar thing with Tunisia, while by that time Egypt was quite pro-western so snubbed the possibility)?
 
Anybody? No ones interested in Iran being smashed in 1980, or Saddam Hussein being viewed as a World Leader in 2008? What affect would a secular Arab Federation have on the War on Terror or a growing oil crisis? Could an Egyptian-Syrian-Iraqi Union have seen Israel defeated in the Six Day War?

Regardless, I'm planning a TL, any feedback is welcome.
 

Hnau

Banned
I believe you need to go further than that. Start in the Great War, and give the Arabs their national homeland that was promised to them in 1915. The northern border of Syria and Iraq down all the way to the Arabian Sea, only contained by the Persian border and the Palestinian area.

It would be cool to see pan-Arabism (and pan-Islamism) expand as an ideology alongside Communism and Fascism. However, I cannot see any way the Allies would allow this to happen in the interbellum... there was a huge amount of rebellion and coup against the Allied mandate throughout the 1920s, and yet the French and British were always able to put it down.

What about Iraq not going pro-Nazi, instead remaining neutral? After 1941 the nation became anti-Nazi anyway, due to Italian defeats. If that brief pro-Nazi period under Rashid Ali could be avoided, there would be no Anglo-Iraq war and no occupation of the country until 1947. I could see a militarist coup / republican revolution in Iraq by 1952, mirroring Egypt (which was also neutral/British friendly throughout WW2) and promising to respect British bases and people.

So we have a Nasserist Republic of Iraq, under some other demogogue that is not as influential as Nasser. However, they do not start accepting Soviet aid until the Suez Crisis comes and goes, launching Nasserism into popularity. Then comes the United Arab Republic in 1958. There is no Hashemite Iraq to create the Iraqi-Jordanian Arab Federation, and Jordan is without support. They don't uncover the July Plot of 1958, which is even more well-funded because of Nasserist Iraq. Pretty soon, Jordan falls under a pan-Arab government that allows Iraqi-Syrian-Egyptian troops in to create a Federation of Arab Republics. It is more federal than the United Arab Republic, and while the federal capital is in Cairo, competition from Baghdad allows a balance that makes Syrian and Jordanian leaders not feel so dominated by Egypt, in addition to more rights for individual members.

Success of the Nasserist Federation, despite numerous rebellions and coups standard to the region, leads to a Libyan revolution in 1964 and the acceptance of that country into the Federation. This causes enough agitation that the Six Days War begins a year early, in 1966. Well, the Federation probably is a little better prepared, but Israel still has the edge over all of them.

Following this, its likely that the War of Attrition will continue, and lets say that Nasser does not abdicate in OTL. Tunisia could join the Arab Federation by 1969. I suspect this firm foundation of pan-Arabism could allow such a federation continue, perhaps even expand, but they aren't going to defeat Israel, and without defeating Israel, they'll never become a great power capable of uniting all Arabic nations.

Perhaps there is some kind of Islamic Revolution somewhere down the road that unites this whole bloc into a caliphate...
 
I believe you need to go further than that. Start in the Great War, and give the Arabs their national homeland that was promised to them in 1915. The northern border of Syria and Iraq down all the way to the Arabian Sea, only contained by the Persian border and the Palestinian area.

It would be cool to see pan-Arabism (and pan-Islamism) expand as an ideology alongside Communism and Fascism. However, I cannot see any way the Allies would allow this to happen in the interbellum... there was a huge amount of rebellion and coup against the Allied mandate throughout the 1920s, and yet the French and British were always able to put it down.

What about Iraq not going pro-Nazi, instead remaining neutral? After 1941 the nation became anti-Nazi anyway, due to Italian defeats. If that brief pro-Nazi period under Rashid Ali could be avoided, there would be no Anglo-Iraq war and no occupation of the country until 1947. I could see a militarist coup / republican revolution in Iraq by 1952, mirroring Egypt (which was also neutral/British friendly throughout WW2) and promising to respect British bases and people.

So we have a Nasserist Republic of Iraq, under some other demogogue that is not as influential as Nasser. However, they do not start accepting Soviet aid until the Suez Crisis comes and goes, launching Nasserism into popularity. Then comes the United Arab Republic in 1958. There is no Hashemite Iraq to create the Iraqi-Jordanian Arab Federation, and Jordan is without support. They don't uncover the July Plot of 1958, which is even more well-funded because of Nasserist Iraq. Pretty soon, Jordan falls under a pan-Arab government that allows Iraqi-Syrian-Egyptian troops in to create a Federation of Arab Republics. It is more federal than the United Arab Republic, and while the federal capital is in Cairo, competition from Baghdad allows a balance that makes Syrian and Jordanian leaders not feel so dominated by Egypt, in addition to more rights for individual members.

Success of the Nasserist Federation, despite numerous rebellions and coups standard to the region, leads to a Libyan revolution in 1964 and the acceptance of that country into the Federation. This causes enough agitation that the Six Days War begins a year early, in 1966. Well, the Federation probably is a little better prepared, but Israel still has the edge over all of them.

Following this, its likely that the War of Attrition will continue, and lets say that Nasser does not abdicate in OTL. Tunisia could join the Arab Federation by 1969. I suspect this firm foundation of pan-Arabism could allow such a federation continue, perhaps even expand, but they aren't going to defeat Israel, and without defeating Israel, they'll never become a great power capable of uniting all Arabic nations.

Perhaps there is some kind of Islamic Revolution somewhere down the road that unites this whole bloc into a caliphate...
Hello, Butterflies ...

Sorry to be SO Blunt ...

But without a British Occupation, None of these Events are Likely to Happen as in OTL!

:eek:
 

Hnau

Banned
The only reason it fell apart was that Syrian leaders hated spending so much time in Cairo instead of their homeland, and they felt dominated by Egypt. With another power (Iraq) to balance the scale, Syria can play the two against each other, and achieve some sense of self-security in the situation.

Also, I use butterflies, but I am of the belief that only direct action causes historical change. History has a momentum to it, on the large scale if not in the small scale. With no Anglo-Iraq War and no Iraqi occupation, the British still use a friendly Iraq to attack both Syria, Lebanon, and Persia, so WW2 is no different. By this time, pro-British/neutral Iraq ITTL is the same as post-occupation Iraq IOTL except that it is more stable, revolutionary forces have had more time to develop, and it has a slightly stronger military and economy. The butterflies only begin to occur across the world in the Iraqi Revolution, mirroring the Egyptian Revolution, in 1952/53. A pseudo-Nasserist Iraq might support Egypt in the Suez Crisis, but the result is much the same: Nasser gets all the credit for beating back Israel and the Allies with the support of America and the Soviet Union. Things don't start deviating until 1958 with the Federation of Arab Republics between Egypt, North Yemen, Syria, Jordan and Iraq. However, what is there really to change from OTL? Merely the acceleration of worsening Arab-Israeli relations that leads to an earlier Six Days War, which might become the Nine or Ten Days War but nevertheless comes to the same outcome because of the lack of military development in the Federation.

The Arabic nations were already in a huge alliance by about this time... internationally, the creation of a unified Federation will cause very few changes in foreign policy.
 
I smell a chance to use my Khaleeji Caliphate timeline. It's not the same of course, as it's the Arabian Peninsula rather than the Trans Africa area, but it may work.
There a two ways to go about this.
The Oil Crisis goes... not so well for the OAPEC. America *and others* turn to other sources of oil, leaving the Persian Gulf in dismay. Saudi Arabia collapses into various smaller states and other area states are similarly adversely affected. Anyway, the Hashemites (the Jordanian Royal Family) return to Mecca and pick up the old trade as Shariff of Mecca. These leads to the declaration of the new Caliphate of All Islam, led by the Hashemites.
The alternative is a future scenario similar to this in which the oil runs out. (which is what the original timeline was about, as well as the below map)
In either case, the result is near immediate war with Iran. After half a decade of war, an unofficial stalemate is reached. Thus, a bipolar (and potentially volatile) Middle East with the Caliphate and the other Arab states on one side, and Iran and Iraq on the other. That is, assuming Iraq survives the aformentioned war!
As a side note, if your curious the numbers within present day SA corresponds with the provinces, #10 is the Kingdom of Nejd-Asir, the succesor state of SA.

KhCaBLANK.PNG
 
Interesting stuff on the Caliphate, but I doubt the Hashemites would form it, they were far more interested in British con-mons and loose confederation, partly why they fell in Iraq and almost so in Jordan.

I see the UAR as capable of lasting a lot longing (ie a few decades) if Syrian interests are adressed, ironically it was Damascus who jumped at the chance to be led by the great Nasser, despite his own wishes for Federation, which led to Egyptian domination and nationalist anger. This and Israel naturally.

Does anyone see the Six-Day-War, in OTL's incarnation as being avoidable? Such a defeat would probably lead to the UAR being greatly weakened.

Anywho, here's the makings of a bare-bones ATL, starting from before the POD, for a bit of background detail. All comment and critique welcome:

July 23rd 1952: The Free Officers Movement, a group of young army officers led by General Muhammad Naguib and Colonel Gamal Abdel Nasser overthrows King Farouk of Egypt. They are displeased with the handling of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, high levels of corruption within Egyptian society, and continued British influence over the country.

July 28th 1952: After much discussion between the former government and Free Officers, it is decided to send Farouk into exile in Italy, while his son will rule as Farouk II. General Naguib becomes Prime Minister of the new government and C-in-C of the Army, while Nasser becomes Interior Minister.

September 11th 1952: After weeks of riots calling for action from Naguib’s government, the Prime Minister implements major land reforms. The move removes the wealthiest landowners who dominate agriculture from power. Not only does the reforms show the Free Officers’ socialist leanings but hurts a major group of monarchist support.

January 1st 1953: Under pressure from Nasser and others, a reluctant Naguib bans all political parties. The Free Officers, now renamed the Revolutionary Command Council, declares it will take over for a ‘transitional’ three-year period before returning Egypt to civilian rule.

July 18th 1953: Less than a year after the coup, the RCC abolishes the monarchy. Naguib is now President and Prime Minister of the Republic of Egypt, however he is losing control of the Council to Colonel Nasser.

February 25th 1954: Increasingly isolated from the younger radicals within the Council, Naguib is forced to resign. Nasser becomes Prime Minister. However Naguib is by far the most popular member of the RCC and protests in Cairo calls for his reinstatement. The Council gives in the next day and Naguib becomes President once more, while Nasser retains the role of Prime Minister and RCC Chairman.

November 14th 1954: Having only a ceremonial role as President, Naguib loses his final power base following an internal struggle with Nasser over the military. Unwilling to maintain the charade, Naguib finally steps down voluntarily, sighting health problems. Nasser takes over as President, now having total control over Egypt.

January 19th 1955: A new constitution is announced. The President is granted massive powers over the National Assembly. Although free elections and a free press are protected, political parties are still banned, with the exception of the Council’s mass organisation, the National Union, while as part of growing nationalisation, the state controls a 51% share in all newspapers. Women are granted the vote and Egypt is declared a secular Republic. This leads to the Muslim Brotherhood, the Arab world’s major Islamist group, being forced underground.

September 15th 1955: Following continued tensions with Britain over Sudan and the Suez Canal Zone, President Nasser signs an arms deal with the Soviet Bloc, paid for with massive cotton exports from Egypt’s booming agricultural sector. Despite holding a loathing for Communism in general, Nasser sees Moscow as a more palatable ally compared to the ‘imperialist’ west. At the same time, Britain forms the Baghdad Pact around the Hashemite Kingdoms of Jordan and Iraq, as well as Persia and Turkey in an effort to retain influence over the Middle East. Nasser sees this as a threat to his own Pan-Arab views, further pushing Egypt out of the Western camp.

March 22nd 1956: Pan-Arab groups, backed by Cairo, begin a series of major protests in Amman, the Jordanian capital, against British influence in the region. By the end of the month King Hussein, fearful of a revolution, removes all British advisors from the county, effectively removing Jordan from the Baghdad Pact. By now Westminster views President Nasser as the primary threat to stability in the region.

May 19th 1956: Nasser recognises the People’s Republic of China. The United States, previously willing to except the Egyptian President’s radical actions, joins Britain in opposing the Cairo regime. American funding is pulled out of the Aswan Dam project on July 19th. Needing money in order to continue the Dam project, and seeing relations with the West as a lost cause, Nasser decides on drastic action.

July 26th 1956: Egyptian forces cross into the Suez Canal Zone without resistance. President Nasser nationalises the Canal. Britain requests support from Washington but with an election nearby, President Eisenhower refuses act on the controversial issue. Meanwhile France, equally hurt by the loss (both nations held major shares in the Canal) suggests unilateral military action, with Israeli support. Anthony Eden, the British Prime Minister is under pressure from backbenchers within the Conservative Party to act, sighting the affair as reminiscent of Hitler’s annexation of the Sudetenland.

October 22nd 1956: The Protocol of Sevres- British, French and Israeli politicians secretly meet to organise an attack on Egypt. Israel hoped to end Cairo’s blockade of the Red Sea and as such was willing to aid an Anglo-French mission to Suez via an invasion of the Sinai Peninsula. Westminster and Paris, once Israeli forces reached the Canal, would intervene supposedly to halt hostilities, by occupying the Canal as a buffer zone. From there they hoped that America and the UN would support the internationalisation of the Canal, in light of Egypt tenuous hold over the region.

October 29th 1956: Operation Kadesh, the Israeli invasion of Sinai begins.

November 5th 1956: Following an aerial bombardment, British and French paratroopers land at Port Said, the Mediterranean entrance to the Canal, beginning Operation Musketeer.

November 6th 1956: The British and French find little support for their actions. Eisenhower presently decrying the suppression of Hungarian rebels by the Soviets is unable to ethically back his European allies. Meanwhile the Commonwealth, expected to back the mother country to the hilt is outraged, with Prime Minister St. Laurent of Canada leading calls for UN intervention. Moscow goes even further with Premier Khrushchev making veiled threats of atomic attacks on London, Paris and Tel Aviv. Finally after threatening to destabilise the British economy by selling off the US’s reserves of pound sterling, Eden gives in to Eisenhower and declares a cease-fire without French knowledge, regardless they soon follows suit.

December 22nd 1956: The Anglo-French Task Force is replaced by the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) the first such UN peacekeeping force deployed. Eden resigns as Prime Minister in January, while President Nasser is hailed as a hero of the Arab world, having ‘won’ a great victory against the former colonial powers.


October 10th 1957: Fearful of Communist and Islamist forces, the pan-Arab Ba’ath Party government in Syria, buoyed by Nasser’s popular appeal, begin talks with Cairo over a political union. Damascus proposes a unitary state dominated by the larger Egyptian Republic. Nasser is less enthusiastic however, due to geography and Syria’s minority but powerful nationalist groups. He insists on a federal model for the time being, to which the Syrians begrudingly agree[POD].

February 1st 1958: The United Arab Republic is formed. Nasser takes the position of Federal President, while retaining his Egyptian Presidency. Meanwhile in Syria, Michel Aflaq, formerly Education Minister and the major architect of the union is made Vice-President of the UAR and President of Syria through Egyptian pressure, backed by massive support in Ba’ath rank and file. The constitution is modelled heavily on Egypt’s, however Syria retains some of its democratic institutions at a regional level. Communist and Islamist groups are banned throughout the UAR.

July 17th 1958: The National Union and Ba’ath Party dissolve to form the Arab Socialist Union.

December 4th 1962: Under mounting pressure from Pan-Arabs, President Qasim of Iraq opens talks with the UAR regarding unification. Nasser travels to Baghdad, causing massive pro-union demonstrations. Although Cairo has been responsible for encouraging Shiite unrest and even an assassination attempt, Qasim sees no other option.

March 10th 1963: Qasim announces the UAR will gain a third member. In return for joining, Qasim retains his presidency and is granted a position in the Arab Socialist Union’s upper echelons, along with autonomy for the Kurds, his primary allies. However Ba’athists, such as General al-Bakr are given key roles in his Cabinet and effectively control Iraq.
 
Last edited:
Top