You mean delaying it from October 1973 to April 1974, right? Either way, while not impossible, it would be unlikely that an Israeli defeat in the Yom Kippur War would wipe Israel off the map. Egypt’s primary motive was to regain the Sinai peninsula from Israeli control, not to make it cease its existence.
WI: No Israel
- Thread starter PGSBHurricane
- Start date
- Status
You mean delaying it from October 1973 to April 1974, right? Either way, while not impossible, it would be unlikely that an Israeli defeat in the Yom Kippur War would wipe Israel off the map. Egypt’s primary motive was to regain the Sinai peninsula from Israeli control, not to make it cease its existence.
I have no doubt that Judaism would take a massive hit, but it would be a wound, not a death sentence. Since the foundation of Israel, the US has been nothing but supportive of the Jewish community, and I have no doubt that, Israel or no Israel, America would do the same (no doubt out of self-interest but they would do it.)
If America can settle a shit-ton of Muslim folks in Dearborn, Michigan, you can expect they’ll do the same for Holocaust refugees somewhere, and you can bet that being a Jew will mean being a patriotic American.
Deleted member 109224
There were pogroms against Jews leaving Morocco to go to Israel. They aren't going to be welcome. France or America is likely where they'd end up.
Today there are 450,000-550,000 French Jews in France, plus another 200,000 in Israel. There are also about 630,000 Jews in Israel from Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia; 120,000 Syrian and Lebanese Jews in Israel.
France would be about 2% Jewish. That's pretty impactful.
And yet, in OTL after the Holocaust, the US support for the Jewish community was... Rather limited in fact. The refugee crisis in Europe lasted into 1960 and a significant part of that refugee population were Jews. Western Europe and the United States took in many hundreds of thousands of these refugees, but the overall displaced population was many millions and the US immigration laws in fact discriminated against displaced Jews trying to emigrate to the US. Opinion polls showed that accepting European refugees was unpopular, and people were more supportive of accepting German refugees than they were of accepting Jewish refugees into the US. (Source here, see this and this for supplementary information.)
The truth is, millions of Jews really didn't have any place besides Israel to go after WW2 and decolonization and while Judaism would indeed survive the fall of Israel, I'd say the tragedy would be worse than only "a wound".
fasquardon
The pogroms happend when Israel was declared. But most jews didn't leave at that time. The majority left in the 60s and 70s, and they often left because of economic reasons.
The conflict with France didn’t help matters. If I’m correct (correct me if I’m wrong) then the uprising against France wasn’t unlike the Pan-Arabism movement in which foreigners in general (which included Jews) were targeted. And even before Israel’s creation, Jews in the Middle East and North Africa were typically treated as second class citizens since the end of the Islamic Golden Age.
If that wound were big enough, then that is how I suggested mass conversions to Christianity or Islam would be possible in order to be more assimilated and live without fear. And while I hope it wouldn’t get that dark for the Jews, I’m not sure mass suicide or even large swathes or alcoholism would be ASB. On one hand, Israel was created with the idea that Jews could not depend on others for their own safety and rights, especially after the Pogroms in Russia (beginning in 1882), the Dreyfus Affair and moreso the Holocaust. And if Israel is destroyed (most likely in 1948), then things would be very bleak indeed with many Jews still not wanting to have to depend on the mercy of others for their safety and rights, given how often they treated throughout the world for centuries as either second class citizens, foreign invaders, or subhuman.
Last edited:
As I understand things Israeli culture was rathe left wing in its early years. I've suggested it in previous threads but in the aftermath of WWII with the stalemate between the Western Allies over where to send Jewish refugees ongoing Stalin, to make himself look magnanimous, offers to convert the Crimean peninsula into a Jewish Autonomous Oblast with open immigration. The already existing JAO is shut down with the Jewish population being relocated as pioneers.
IIRC the Turks actually approached the French looking for some sort of alliance before WWI but for various reasons nothing came of it. I want to say it was while their foreign minister was visiting France but can't be sure.
The Jewish left was quite keen on democracy also, it's why the social democratic parties in Israel quickly distanced themselves from the Soviet Union.
Also, what's the advantage from Stalin's end? Sure, the Soviets took brutal losses in manpower, but they'd lost even more houses and agriculture was heavily damaged - right after the war the Soviets couldn't support properly the population they had. Add to that, Stalin would always worry that the Jews he was allowing in were loyal to something other than the Communist Party and the Soviet state. Just as Stalin distrusted (and persecuted) groups like the Volga Germans and the Polish-speaking Ukrainians and Belarusians.
fasquardon
Would the Jews even seriously consider the USSR, which was oppressive and anti-Semitic in its own right? Not to mention much much more authoritarian with its communism than the Palestinian Jews were with their socialism.
Not an absolute death sentence but not far from one either considering it would be expanding an already major wound.
No Balfour deceleration and after WW 2 jews migrate to the USA. Their was already sizable population of jews in America at that time
I'd expect the US to become the de facto "jewish capital", though it would likely not be anything like J Street or AIPAC. You might see a change in Judaism to turn America into the Holy Land, and I wouldn't be surprised if there is a Jewish military tradition in the US similar to the Mormon military tradition. I would expect the Jewish population to keep leaning to the left, perhaps hard left.
The Middle East stays balkanized, with Sunni/Shi'ite the main divider- I could see the US abandoning the Shah in the 1950s, and Iran becoming communist, or at least pro-Soviet.
I do think anti-semitism would be less of a thing in the Middle East, as the Jews are not a threat, and I would not be surprised if Islam is less militant without a Jewish enemy. I could see Islamic terrorist groups being butterflied, being replaced by more nationalistic group , or the Sunni-Shi'ite divide becoming the big thing, which the West would care about a lot less.
The Middle East stays balkanized, with Sunni/Shi'ite the main divider- I could see the US abandoning the Shah in the 1950s, and Iran becoming communist, or at least pro-Soviet.
I do think anti-semitism would be less of a thing in the Middle East, as the Jews are not a threat, and I would not be surprised if Islam is less militant without a Jewish enemy. I could see Islamic terrorist groups being butterflied, being replaced by more nationalistic group , or the Sunni-Shi'ite divide becoming the big thing, which the West would care about a lot less.
Wasn't an issue until the Iranian revolution and the decline of Arab-Nationalism
The question over whether a decisive military defeat would lead to another Holocaust is one that Egyptian leadership in speeches and radio pronouncements answered repeatedly in the affirmative, but the question of capacity is a serious one to consider.
I would imagine in this case, there would be evacuations and refugee resettlement in the US as well as France, but I think, presuming this is after Independence, that the Mizrahi Jewish population would because of its lower amounts of social capital be less likely to escape for the most part, lacking relatives in the West and being much lower on the socioeconomic scale, much more likely to live in the periphery of the country or in poorly defended development towns. So you would see an inverse of the first Holocaust in terms of who gets hit the hardest amongst the Jewish population.
I would imagine in this case, there would be evacuations and refugee resettlement in the US as well as France, but I think, presuming this is after Independence, that the Mizrahi Jewish population would because of its lower amounts of social capital be less likely to escape for the most part, lacking relatives in the West and being much lower on the socioeconomic scale, much more likely to live in the periphery of the country or in poorly defended development towns. So you would see an inverse of the first Holocaust in terms of who gets hit the hardest amongst the Jewish population.
Given it didn't happen to the Jews in the Arab world and with threat of western retaliation. A genocide is quite unlikely .
Nasser prefered to help them to emigrated, he only send attack order in defense...others dunno
He and Hafez al-Assad both said that they would drive the Jews into the sea, and his personal representative publicly declared the Protocols of the Elders of Zion to be a real document that outlined the plans of the Zionists that could only be met with deadly force. Shukairy of The PLO said that there would be "no Jewish survivors of the Holy War to free Palestine". Now, perhaps by saying this Nasser himself only meant the destruction of the Israeli state and army and was just blustering. I suppose its possible, but I have my doubts.
The only leader in either of the largest wars who did not openly spout eliminationist rhetoric was King Hussein of Jordan. Essentially every comment he made referenced the Holy Sites in some manner or another but did not openly call for genocide.
Propaganda campaigns in all three countries however touted the blood libel as being real in educational and communication contexts.
Last edited:
Ie out, I dunno about ASSAD(neither one) but Nasser didn't become such radical till later on so at worst would be the collateral damage but he would support emigration/deportation.
I think anti-semitism will be lower (albeit not non-existant) in the Middle East but I think that would be offset by increased anti-Semitism in the West. Even after the revelation of the Holocaust, anti-semitism in the US was at its peak and wouldn't go down until 1948 once Israel was created. With a defeated Israel and America taking in the lion's share, I can see the American public becoming more anti-semitic as they wouldn't want large swathes of Jews entering the country all at once. And because of this, immigration laws might not relax in 1952 like IOTL.
- Status