WI - Israel Doesn't Seize the Golan Heights?

[Binky the Clown]

While reading about the Six Day War on Wikipedia, I found this passage about the Golan Heights:

On June 7 and 8, the Israeli leadership debated about whether the Golan Heights should be attacked as well; the attack on Syria was initially planned for June 8, but was postponed for 24 hours. At 3 am on June 9, Syria announced its acceptance of the cease-fire. Despite this, four hours later at 7 am, Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Dayan "gave the order to go into action against Syria."

Let's say just for the sake of argument that the Syrian response to the ceasefire is accepted and the Golan Heights remain in Syrian hands. Will there be a Yom Kippur War, and will Syria get involved? Would the Camp David Accords still take place? Please help.

 

[oudi14]

Offhand, I would say that there will still be awar in 1973. Sadat will still want to break the stalemate over the Sinai occupation, whatever the status of the Golan is. I believe that Syria would still back Egypt, but maybe just by firing a lot of rockets and shells into northern Israel. I don't really see Syrian armour pouring down off the Golan into the Galilee; that didn't happen in '67 either, although I remember that a Kibbutz was attacked by Syrian infantry.

 

[Chris S]

I think there would still be a Yom Kippur War and the Camp David Accords.

Lebanon might be different though. Certainly if Israel invades in 1982 as per OTL the invasion itself will be carried out a bit differently without any Israeli troops entering Lebanon from the Golan Heights.

Additionally it will mean most of the peace process focus after Egypt and Jordan will be on the Palestinians since peace treaties with Lebanon and Syria would not be needed in order to end any Israeli occupation of part of their territory (so peace treaties with those states would probably be put on the back burner even though they might be easier to achieve in the absence of any occupied land).

 

[Clint]

The question of taking the Golan was asked after Syria's lack of action. The reason it was still taken was that Syria was one of the major causes of the war, with repeated attacks on Israeli towns. The hights had to be taken, sooner or later. There is little reason for the Israeli cabint to choose not to.

Though in a hypothetical scenario that Israel chooses not to, it would be interesting to see if Egypt even tries to attack, now that Syria has very little incentive to get involved. Though maybe Syria would feel forced to, since it's inactivety would look like the reason for Arab failure in 1967.

Then again it's always possible for another border skermish between Israel and Syria will lead to a limited operation to take the hights, that would lead to the same situation more or less in 1973.