WI: Israel uses nuclear weapons in the 1980s

Let's assume Israel has nuclear weapons during the 1980s, which seems like a reasonably safe assumption. What were to happen if, in the course of a war with [insert Syria, Egypt, Jordan or probably all three in this extreme situation] Israel had used nuclear weapons? I'm sure international condemnation would follow, but I'm specifically thinking of the military and especially economic and health effects.

It seems that nuking any of its neighbors would end up having long-term negative effects on Israel's economy and the health of its citizens, assuming it survives war. I'd also be interested in how the international economy would be changed and how far the medical consequences of a nuclear strike would go on a regional level and global level.
 
Depends on what is nuked. If Israel washed Egypt out to the sea by nuking the Aswan dam, then you'd have condemnation ringing from around the world. Any other sites would still illicit mass condemnation, but chances are a few countries would work with Israel, even if only covertly.

You can definitely count on an unprecedented surge in unrest and insurgency. Especially if Israel is in the Lebanon when the strikes happen.
 
I'm pretty sure Israeli doctrine is not to use nukes unless it looks like the state has collapsed and the country is being overran. This isn't official, and it's possible Israel has another strategy, but the best money is on that. Therefore it is a deterrence option - leave us alone because if we go down, we're taking you with us.

Before it got to the point where Israeli use became possible, there is likely to be immense superpower negotiating. In a more practical matter, for the Arabs to launch another war in the 1980s we'd need a very different world. The Arabs were tired of losing wars and would likely only attack if they were much more confidant they could win.

About the only scenario I could see is one where Islamist movements have taken control of the Middle East - the Grand Mosque Seizure of 1979 leads to the overthrow of the House of Saud, Muslim Brotherhood seizes control of Egypt and Syria, etc. They might be willing to continue a war thinking they could succeed where the Arab Socialists had failed. We'd need to see some PODs in the 1970s though.

Before figuring out what happens after Israel uses nuclear weapons, we'd have to understand why they'd be doing so. It would have to be in a much different world than the one we know.
 
Use of nukes means the USSR immediately drops nukes on Israeli's nuclear weapons sites and delivery systems. Civilians are not targeted, but because those sites are in civilian areas, civilian causalities will be extreme, not the USSR's fault, the Israeli Military shouldn't have placed such sites in civilian areas. The irony of the statement not being lost on anyone I hope.

There was a clear understanding that Israel could possess nukes, but if it used them, it was lights out via the USSR which has its interests in the Middle East that Israel's resort to a nuclear weapon just threatened.

As for the Aswan Dam, that would actually do Egypt a favor in the long run. It was stupid as fuck to build that dam and it utterly disrupted the water supply and farmlands of the Nile River Basin in Egypt.
 

Lunarwolf

Banned
As for the Aswan Dam, that would actually do Egypt a favor in the long run. It was stupid as fuck to build that dam and it utterly disrupted the water supply and farmlands of the Nile River Basin in Egypt.

In the short term, it kills Cairo a city of 20 million people.
 
Use of nukes means the USSR immediately drops nukes on Israeli's nuclear weapons sites and delivery systems. Civilians are not targeted, but because those sites are in civilian areas, civilian causalities will be extreme, not the USSR's fault, the Israeli Military shouldn't have placed such sites in civilian areas. The irony of the statement not being lost on anyone I hope.

I don't know that the USSR would take such a step. They have no core interests involved after all. They certainly were not prepared to take such a step in 1973.


As for the Aswan Dam, that would actually do Egypt a favor in the long run. It was stupid as fuck to build that dam and it utterly disrupted the water supply and farmlands of the Nile River Basin in Egypt.

The long run being about 500 to 1000 years. Estimates vary, but blowing the Aswan Dam would probably kill between 70% and 95% of the Egyptian population, directly or indirectly. Egypt would essentially cease to exist as a country.


It's hard to evaluate the issues given that Israel by the 1980's in our time, was essentially at peace with Egypt and had neutralized Jordan. The only remaining belligerent was Syria, which was too small and impoverished to be a genuine threat. This was demonstrated conclusively during the air war of 1982, and the dual occupations of Lebanon.

We can only assess things in the vaguest terms. But the most likely outcome would probably be a degree of destabilization of formerly stable regimes, and a quest by multiple states - Syria, Egypt, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Yemen and possibly others to obtain their own nuclear deterrent or equivalent deterrent. I would also expect massive oil price shocks, I can't think of anything that would cause OPEC to cohere so firmly or aggressively. You'd also probably find a net erosion in American power in the region as even pro-American states line up to find new patrons.
 
Despite occasionally inflammatory rhetoric (which in this conflict is really plentifull on all sides) the very point of Israel having nukes is probably not to ever have to use them.
It is VERY hard to see ANY credible scenario where Israel resorts to nukes, precisely because everyone unofficially knows they have them, and this has been the case for, well, decades.
Arab leaders, no matter how extreme or reckless, won't like to have their capital nuked, and would probably act in such a way to avoid the possibility.
Also, any Israeli leadership approaching sanity would try to have not to go this far if given half a chance. Now, one could argue that sanity was never exactly in large supplies in Israeli leaders of the eighties (the whole Lebanon catastrophe is probably proof enough), but I wouldn't say any of them was ever that far out.
"Destroying the Zionist entity" became a moot point after Israel got nukes, which in all likelihood happened sometime in the seventies (it was not top priority even before, actually, but that's another matter). In the eighties, Arab governments ranged from pursuing some sort of coexistence with Israel, or protect from what they perceived as Israeli aggression. Iran is different, and an extreme scenario could involve an Israeli pre-emptive nuclear strike against Iran. This would require the Israeli leadership going seriously nuts for unexplicable ASB reasons.
I also do not think that Islamist regimes are more likely than "Socialist" ones to create this sort of situation. The short-term result of Islamist takeover is likely to be weaker Arab states confronting Israel, which would not elicit a nuclear reaction, of course.
Another possibility, again very far out, is a situation where an Arab state, most likely Iraq, somehow gets nukes and is ruled by someone even madder than Saddam, who does not fear a mutual nuclear confrontation (I don't think that Saddam would be this foolish). In that case, however, I can see the big power intervening quickly and decisively.
 
IMHO the only situation where Israel uses nukes is when they see the Arabs completely overrunning Israel unless this is done. Under those circumstances I doubt the Israelis will care about the world reaction. If you don't exist any more it doesn't matter, only if you exist do you have to deal with this. The best case scenario is they are used in a more tactical manner hitting military targets or troop concentrations and the Arabs told go home or else. Worse case scenario, either the Arabs refuse to stop or there are serious massacres going on, you'll see a Masada Option. This could be hitting the Aswan Dam (goodbye Egypt), Damascus, Baghdad etc. If the Israelis feel the "west" has betrayed them, they might go so far as to nuke gulf oil fields - if you hit an oil field with a ground burst followed by an airburst to blow the fallout down, goodbye oil field for a LONG time.

Again, IMHO only facing a complete collapse/elimination of the state will cause the Israelis to use nukes (of course if WMD used by the Arabs...).
 
Israel has never really been aggressive other than to defend its homeland. Israel would not go to war with Egypt in the 1980s. They just signed the Camp David Accords in 1979 and by 1982 had evacuated the Sinai. If Israel was going to nuke Egypt, it would have been during Yom Kippur, but the Israelis knew that nuking Egypt would mean a response from Egypt's ally in Moscow.

Against Jordan, its possible, but both Jordan and Israel were struggling to deal with the Palestinians attacking both of them. They sort of cooperated when dealing with the Palestinians. Israel and Jordan are now close allies, despite the fact that distrust still exists, but Jordan needs to keep in good with Israel because of water rights.

Another war with Syria is possible, but Israel did wipe out effectively their entire tank army on top of Golan in Yom Kippur. Again, Israel would have no reason to attack Syria, they already occupied Syrian territory in the form of the Golan - all battles are fought on Arab land.

Israel has no real motivation to nuke anyone in the 1980s, all their enemies are either at peace, too weak to do anything or disinterested in crushing Israel.

Israel's nuclear policy is ambiguity. They will neither confirm nor deny the existence of their nuclear weapons - worst kept secret ever. But we do know that while they say they will not be the first country to introduce nuclear weapons to the Middle East. Yet they took out an Iraqi nuclear site in Operation Opera and a Syrian nuclear site in Operation Orchard.

If Israel was going to use nuclear weapons against anyone, it would have been Egypt in Yom Kippur or Six Days.
 
I don't know that the USSR would take such a step. They have no core interests involved after all. They certainly were not prepared to take such a step in 1973.

Yes they were and ships were loading and Nixon told to reign in Israel or it would enter the fight.

The long run being about 500 to 1000 years. Estimates vary, but blowing the Aswan Dam would probably kill between 70% and 95% of the Egyptian population, directly or indirectly. Egypt would essentially cease to exist as a country.

The Aswan Dam is already wrecking Egyptian Agriculture. Better to start lowering its reservoir now and decommission it.
It's hard to evaluate the issues given that Israel by the 1980's in our time, was essentially at peace with Egypt and had neutralized Jordan. The only remaining belligerent was Syria, which was too small and impoverished to be a genuine threat. This was demonstrated conclusively during the air war of 1982, and the dual occupations of Lebanon.

SAA decisively halted and ripped apart the IDF drive on the Beruit-Damascus Highway. Had the IDF seized it, there would have been no Hezbollah. That they didn't was because SAA despite being outnumbered and outgunned, stopped them cold.
 
My Terminator Timeline Expanded (check my sig) has Israel use nuclear weapons to destroy much of the Middle East, but it's explicitly ASB and they only did it after Saddam nukes much of Iran during a longer Iran-Iraq War.
 
The only possible scenario is that there is no Camp david accords (which hinges on different YKW or post war period). That means Egypt is still hostile and in Soviet camp. If Soviets are willing to reuip Egyptian army (likely, they did Syrian) then Israel is facing large and well euiped army who actually knows what to do. then in 1980s there is a rematch (possible since Egypt doesn't get any resolution) and nukes come out.

My guess is on Golan, as was OTL 1973 plan, and that front is far more dangerous anyway.
 
IMHO the only situation where Israel uses nukes is when they see the Arabs completely overrunning Israel unless this is done. Under those circumstances I doubt the Israelis will care about the world reaction. If you don't exist any more it doesn't matter, only if you exist do you have to deal with this. The best case scenario is they are used in a more tactical manner hitting military targets or troop concentrations and the Arabs told go home or else. Worse case scenario, either the Arabs refuse to stop or there are serious massacres going on, you'll see a Masada Option. This could be hitting the Aswan Dam (goodbye Egypt), Damascus, Baghdad etc. If the Israelis feel the "west" has betrayed them, they might go so far as to nuke gulf oil fields - if you hit an oil field with a ground burst followed by an airburst to blow the fallout down, goodbye oil field for a LONG time.

Again, IMHO only facing a complete collapse/elimination of the state will cause the Israelis to use nukes (of course if WMD used by the Arabs...).

Ya. This.

Possible future political consequences for Israel are irrelevant when they're facing extinction are the last things they would be worrying about. Or that matter.

It was called the Samson Option for a reason....
 
Top