WI: Nasser a Communist

What if Nasser a Communist

krushev-nasser_1964-e1416877504855.jpg


I saw the comment below in chat about Nasser and it had me thinking what if Nasser went full on Communist? In OTL he dabbled in Socialism and was friendly with the Soviet Union but still stuck to non alignment. So Nasser embraces Communism and, instead of Pan Arab Nationalism, he pushes for a Communist Arab Union. I think it would make a really cool ATL if anyone would be interested?

Had he been a communist and in favor of popular rule most of my criticism of him would evaporate.
 
I think it would present problems for him.

One is that it undermines Arab nationalism as Communism is a trans-nationalist movement. There is also the concern that the result would be domination by a foreign power (the Soviet Union) rather than Egyptians being in charge of Egypt.

Second, it would strengthen opposition to Nasser both within Egypt and the Arab world. He was hostile to the Arab monarchies, but was generally able to work with them in regards to outside powers (especially Israel). However, a Communist Nasser would just be greeted with hostility and no cooperation. Likely, there would be sufficient opposition within Egypt that it might lead to a coup like happened in Syria when it was thought the Communists got too influential.

Third, it would make the US immediately hostile. The US consistently tried to remain friendly with Egypt and Nasser in order to keep him away (and later pry him away) from the Soviet Union. The US was fine with Nasser as an Arab nationalist since it saw some form of Arab nationalism inevitable and thus had to work with it. Arab Communists however were to be opposed completely.

Depending on when it happened, it might even result in outright invasion. It is hard to see how the British and French don't overthrow Nasser if he goes Communist prior or right after nationalizing the Suez Canal. The US would be completely supportive, and whatever plan is adopted will probably succeed. If it happens afterwards, the US starts supporting Israel big time (IOTL, this did not really start happening until after 1967 and not really until the 1973 War and the Begin-Sadat peace treaty).

I really don't see how the West could allow a Communist to be in control of the Suez Canal. Most likely, one of the other Egyptian colonels removes Nasser in a coup, and fills the same role he did historically, just without the charisma.
 
I think it would present problems for him.

One is that it undermines Arab nationalism as Communism is a trans-nationalist movement. There is also the concern that the result would be domination by a foreign power (the Soviet Union) rather than Egyptians being in charge of Egypt.

Second, it would strengthen opposition to Nasser both within Egypt and the Arab world. He was hostile to the Arab monarchies, but was generally able to work with them in regards to outside powers (especially Israel). However, a Communist Nasser would just be greeted with hostility and no cooperation. Likely, there would be sufficient opposition within Egypt that it might lead to a coup like happened in Syria when it was thought the Communists got too influential.

Third, it would make the US immediately hostile. The US consistently tried to remain friendly with Egypt and Nasser in order to keep him away (and later pry him away) from the Soviet Union. The US was fine with Nasser as an Arab nationalist since it saw some form of Arab nationalism inevitable and thus had to work with it. Arab Communists however were to be opposed completely.

Depending on when it happened, it might even result in outright invasion. It is hard to see how the British and French don't overthrow Nasser if he goes Communist prior or right after nationalizing the Suez Canal. The US would be completely supportive, and whatever plan is adopted will probably succeed. If it happens afterwards, the US starts supporting Israel big time (IOTL, this did not really start happening until after 1967 and not really until the 1973 War and the Begin-Sadat peace treaty).

I really don't see how the West could allow a Communist to be in control of the Suez Canal. Most likely, one of the other Egyptian colonels removes Nasser in a coup, and fills the same role he did historically, just without the charisma.

Much thanks for the reply you make very good points.:) I suppose if Nasser did take this step he would have to do it artfully. I figure he would have to wait until 1958-59, that way his regime is well established and Amer has pretty much cleared out everyone who could possible pose a threat. He could probably count on Khaled Mohieddin, who had some communist ties, and other left leaning members of the Free Officers for support.

Internationally and regionally its a bit of an issue like you said. The Arab Monarchies and the United States will flip. I do think Nasser would however find his position in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq improved. All of these places had strong communist elements who in OTL served as some of Nasser's biggest stopping blocks. It would certainly improve his relations with Qasim and Bakdash.
 
I do think Nasser would however find his position in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq improved. All of these places had strong communist elements who in OTL served as some of Nasser's biggest stopping blocks. It would certainly improve his relations with Qasim and Bakdash.

Of course, the major reason Syria agreed to unite with Egypt in the United Atab Republic was the belief it would diminish the influence of Communists in Syria. If it appeared Nasser would strengthen Bakdash/Communist influence in Syria, Syria would likely turn away from Egypt.

Iraq would be interesting. IOTL, Qasim was dictator. His ally Arif was a Pan-Arab and Baathist who was pro-Nasser. Qasim turned to the Iraqi Communists as a counterweight to Nasserism and union with Egypt. Eventually this would lead to Qasim's death. ITTL, it would be the Communists who would be pushing for union/alignment with Egypt. So Qasim might support Arif's Baathists if they turned away from Nasser. We might see a union of Syria and Iraq, or we might see all three countries (Egypt, Syria, and Iraq) stay independent.
 
Of course, the major reason Syria agreed to unite with Egypt in the United Atab Republic was the belief it would diminish the influence of Communists in Syria. If it appeared Nasser would strengthen Bakdash/Communist influence in Syria, Syria would likely turn away from Egypt.

Interesting so It would weaken Nasser's hand with existing Syrian leadership and expand his influence with revolutionary forces. I suppose Syria would have to be taken in a communist coup in this ATL since Quwatli won't agree to a merger.
 
Egypt

You can not build wall around Egypt. With out wall you can not keep people in hence everyone with Brain leaves hence you can not be full blown communist.
 
Egypt

You can not build wall around Egypt. With out wall you can not keep people in hence everyone with Brain leaves hence you can not be full blown communist.

True, it wouldn't be like North Korea. I guess best bet is Nasser rules with communist leanings similar to Qasim.
 
I can't see him becoming a Communist that easily. Let's not forget that he only fell into the Soviet sphere of influence after his arms deal with Dulles and Eden failed. Despite leading a basically secularist regime, he also described himself as a "practicing Muslim with no love for Communism and no wish to be its agent". Maybe the beef with the Muslim Brotherhood could get even more extreme than OTL, leading Nasser to do away with religion altogether.

A possibility could be something like happened in Iraq with General Qasem, when the Communist Party had a leading influence. So there probably would be two rivalling factions within the Egyptian junta: Nasser supported by the Communists, and maybe Anwar al-Sadat by pan-Arabists. The Pan-Arabist faction might even cooperate with the Baathists in Iraq (they tried a coup in 1963).
 
Top