WI: Was it possible for Nasser to unite all Arab countries in one country?

If I don't say mistakes, Naser created the UAR in order to unite all the Arab countries, but only succeeded with Syria. And what if he had succeeded in reuniting all the Arab countries in one country? Would it be the Arab equivalent of Garibaldi and Bismark?
 
As much as I hate to say this, Nasser's attempt was doomed. You're talking ethnic differences and people in power who would oppose such a union. The sheer challenges involved make it very difficult at the least.

But if he had pulled it off? I'd say Germany is an apt comparison. Even if the UAR is limited to the "Arab" bit (i.e. from Egypt to Oman, from Syria to Yemen), we'd be talking a powerful regional hegemon who upsets the balance of local power, and in possession of vast wealth, capable of toppling the global economy at a whim though controlling oil sales. And if we include the Arab-Berber part, we'd have a massive nation with even more resources larger than the EU.
 
The United Arab Republic failed because Nasser's Egypt effectively treated Syria like it was a vassal state, not a equal Arab state. Nasser demanded that all political parties in Syria be banned and attempted to form a centralized authority based in Damascus for one half of the year and in Cairo for the other half of the year, abolishing all regional governments in the process. This dominant attitude from Nasser effectively created the idea of Syrian nationalism, which slowly built up popularity until the military overthrew the UAR-aligned government in 1961. The government that replaced it eventually became so unstable that it was overthrown in 1963, leading to the Ba'ath Party-led dictatorship that leads Syria to this day.

Nasser's extreme secularism is also bound to be a cause of tension in this united Arab nation. He once famously mocked the Muslim Brotherhood for demanding he force Egyptian women to wear headscarves.

Also, other nations in the Middle East saw the UAR as a threat, especially Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq, leading to the latter two forming their own union to combat the UAR. In fact, tensions in Lebanon over whether or not it would join the UAR were so tense that it led to a three month civil war, which necessitated a US military intervention, despite Nasser making it clear he never wanted Lebanon in the UAR.
 
Kick
Impossible - the social structure is stuck at the medieval level. Clan strife is still typical for them, and interfaith differences can provoke a civil war.
 

Khanzeer

Banned
If I don't say mistakes, Naser created the UAR in order to unite all the Arab countries, but only succeeded with Syria. And what if he had succeeded in reuniting all the Arab countries in one country? Would it be the Arab equivalent of Garibaldi and Bismark?
I would say an arab speaking unified empire from morroco to oman has been elusive since time of marwan II.And administratively it does not make any sense either.Best you can hope for is a unified Arab armed forces like a larger version of Gulf council or NATO.In this force all arab states send their contingents and they would be under one unified command and hope for standardization of equipment and tactics
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Impossible - the social structure is stuck at the medieval level. Clan strife is still typical for them, and interfaith differences can provoke a civil war.
I was unsure if this was Islamophobia/trolling or plain old ignorance of a different cultural group that could be corrected through discussion in this thread.

However, upon reviewing your record, you ALREADY have a 2019 kick for Islamophobia. Mystery solved.

Kicked for a week for Islamophobia/trolling.

Strongly recommend you do not dip into this pot again.
 

Khanzeer

Banned
Have Nasser use the Ba'ath party and other local Arab nationalist groups as proxies in Syria or accepts the demands of the 1961 Syrian Coup for autonomy.
Use the same model with the other various countries that join as Arab nationalist groups come to power over the years.

https://www.sav.sk/journals/uploads/092611431_Sorby.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1961_Syrian_coup_d'état#The_coup
Gaddafi was a great fan of Nasseer but the Saudis were dead against him.So obviously any states under saudi influence would be hostile to him

I guess the Egypt saudi tussle in yemen is microcosm of socio political and ideological differences in the arab speaking world at that time
 
I think you would need at least a pre-WW1 POD to make any pan-Arab unification attempt somewhat successful. Gamal Nasser had no shot in hell of creating a united republic across the Arab world. Especially when Arab monarchists and republicans, Arab Islamists and secular nationalists, the Arabs and Israelis (who controlled contested territory claimed by Arabs), etc. were constantly at each other's throats while being egged on by the Western and Communist powers.
 
No, there are plenty of distinct regionalistic tendencies the region and that's not even taking into account distinct ideological currents within the Arab world. A unified Arab state rooted in Nasser's principles wouldn't be popular with Islamists, monarchists, socialists, communists, liberals and minorities like the Kurds, Assyrians and Druze.

It would be akin to trying to make every English-speaking country unite into a single country-that would be not popular with a LOT of people and still is more plausible than unifying the Arab world given that at least the Anglosphere has relatively fewer political factions of note.
 
Last edited:
Gaddafi was a great fan of Nasseer but the Saudis were dead against him.So obviously any states under saudi influence would be hostile to him

I guess the Egypt saudi tussle in yemen is microcosm of socio political and ideological differences in the arab speaking world at that time

In that case what if he focuses on places that directly border Egypt like Gaddafi's Libya and Sudan to try and make the country more manageable and to better establish its self as the leading arab country.
 

Kaze

Banned
No, it would be sabotaged by the actions of the CIA and the KGB - they will play both sides down the middle keeping each nation from falling into the other's sphere, but if the nations where to come together under a single master - the KGB and CIA would work together to subvert its implementation.
 
Top