Jewish / Israeli ATL's

Someone in the ASB forum started some Jewish / Israeli ATL's / ISOT's that I don't really care for. Here are some more appropriate ATL's:-

(0) I heard on the email group
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alternate-history
that someone wrote a story where the Jews never left Palestine but stayed there down the centuries to this day.

Of the Jewish diaspora, (a) how many scattered after the Romans suppressed the two revolts, and (b) how many had already emigrated? If in this ATL the Diaspora is smaller and many fewer Jews get into the Hijaz for one Muhammad ibn Abdullah to contact, he might have become a merchant like his father, or preached Christianity instead of inventing his own religion, and if so, this leads into a "no Islam" time line.

(1) In 1949 Israel takes the whole of the West Bank. Shorter frontier to defend, more room for settlers. Nablus returns to its ancient name Shekhem, etc. (What name would Jenin get?)

(2) Geological POD: there is a wide open natural sea strait instead of the Suez Canal.

(3) Geological POD: the Emeq Yitsre.el (from Haifa eastwards) fault graben sinks a bit lower and the sea comes through into the Jordan Valley.

(4) OTL: I read that one of the later Roman or Byzantine emperors let the Jews build a 4th temple. But as the work started there was an eruption of fire from the caves and cisterns below the temple site and the work was abandoned and never restarted. This was likely a sewer gas explosion ignited by a torch (= a piece of burning wood carried by its cold end). Thanks to dirty lazy people dumping their house and street foulness in the first place that comes to hand.
ATL: No sewer gas explosion. The 4th temple is built. Jews return and a Yishuv reforms. Then somewhat like (0) hereinabove.

(5) Napoleon does not attack Russia. Napoleon does attack Egypt and marches into Palestine as OTL. That leaves Russia free to attack Turkey hard while Turkey is sending its army south to defend against Napoleon. Turkey loses a big army in snow on the Allahuekber mountains in NE Turkey (as happened OTL in 1914). When the dust settles, European powers have the Middle East, or at least Palestine and Lebanon and Syria and Egypt. Mass settlement by Europeans there. Israel starts to form a century before OTL. Israel has enough trouble from Arabs for Israel to need a big army and keep it in practice. If all this does not butterfly Hitler away, this would bring some sort of practicality to the understandable but anachronistic (and somewhat distressing) query sometimes asked OTL by young Israeli children: "Why didn't the Israeli Army prevent the Holocaust?".
 
Last edited:
Anthony Appleyard said:
This was likely a sewer gas explosion ignited by a torch (= a piece of burning wood carried by its cold end).
LOL
I can't help but find defining the word torch as funny. :D
 

Ian the Admin

Administrator
Donor
A lot of Jews DID stay in Palestine, historically. It's not like the Diaspora actually involved 99% of the population leaving. IIRC, Jews overseas simply had a higher population growth rate than those left in Palestine, and came to predominate.
 
What if Israel had become a pro-Soviet state rather than a pro-western one? How would the collapse of the USSR have affected it?
 
poster342002 said:
What if Israel had become a pro-Soviet state rather than a pro-western one? How would the collapse of the USSR have affected it?

Yikes! Never mind Israel, what effect would it have in the rest of the world? Communism can now define itself as the "protector of the Jewish people persecuted so brutally by the ignorant, bigoted and the lackeys of world imperialism". The US will need to ally with some Arab faction to successfully run a containment strategy. Their options are rather limited as their Saudi friends do not approve one bit of Pan-Arab nationalism. With luck, the State dept manages to draw some reformist secularists into its camp with aid and military support. More realistically, they'll stick to what they know and back brutish autocratic regimes with traditional roots. That sours the reform-minded Arabs against the US, and may move the secular democrats and Baathists to join the Soviet camp in spite of it having Israel in it. The only friend left is Islamism... say Hi to Hizbullah, Mr Military Advisor. I wonder how bad the US would be prepared to let things get before they either were forced to intervene against their allies or wash their hands of the whole thing.

Ouch
 
I wrote a TL on the old board about sharon's tank units being delayed in transferring from the sinai to to the golan in 1973, so they couldn't fight on either front. Israel nukes syria, egypt quickly declares a cease-fire, and the former, devastated Israel becomes a nasty semi-radioactive lebanon, with syrian army and IDF remnants battling it out along with militias for control of the remaining intact land.
 
carlton_bach said:
Yikes! Never mind Israel, what effect would it have in the rest of the world? Communism can now define itself as the "protector of the Jewish people persecuted so brutally by the ignorant, bigoted and the lackeys of world imperialism". The US will need to ally with some Arab faction to successfully run a containment strategy. Their options are rather limited as their Saudi friends do not approve one bit of Pan-Arab nationalism. With luck, the State dept manages to draw some reformist secularists into its camp with aid and military support. More realistically, they'll stick to what they know and back brutish autocratic regimes with traditional roots. That sours the reform-minded Arabs against the US, and may move the secular democrats and Baathists to join the Soviet camp in spite of it having Israel in it. The only friend left is Islamism... say Hi to Hizbullah, Mr Military Advisor. I wonder how bad the US would be prepared to let things get before they either were forced to intervene against their allies or wash their hands of the whole thing.

Ouch
Might not be so bad. If the US is backing the Arabs, Israel might not last so long...

Such a scenario might lead to Israeli terrorists in Palestine, though I doubt they'd be suicide bombers. I could be wrong.
 
so, with the US backing the Arabs, Israel wouldn't last long.. and this would be a good thing?! How long would it be before people here start talking about the "Second Holocaust"..... one that we had a hand in....
 

Leo Caesius

Banned
I would imagine that Aramaic would occupy an even larger place in the lives of Jews today if they were to remain in Israel. The Samaritans, for example, did stay on; as did the Masoretes - the modern pointing of the Hebrew scripture that we use today was developed in Tiberias sometime around the 9th century. Clearly Palestine remained an important religious and intellectual center for the Jews throughout late antiquity and into the early Middle Ages, until the center(s) of gravity shifted elsewhere.

It would be interesting to see a Judaism that had not developed in isolation from Palestine. I would imagine that it would be much more similar to the Samaritan or Karaite varieties - with the development of local centers of worship, and less of a focus on the importance of oral tradition vis-a-vis the written canon.
 
A lot of Jews DID stay in Palestine, historically. It's not like the Diaspora actually involved 99% of the population leaving. IIRC, Jews overseas simply had a higher population growth rate than those left in Palestine, and came to predominate.

Yes and quite a few probably converted to Islam. The Palestinians have the same and possibly firmer blood rights to that land.

Though you shouldnt take this to mean I am "anti-Israeli". I think that the fighting over there is propigated by a few old, bitter, spiteful men whos only claim to power is their ability to further the cause of hate. I dont know, eventually it will stop when both sides bleed each other dry. They are both two stubborn, iron willed people, which should tell you just how much they are related. They desearve each other.
 
Justin, I was going to go on about who was/wasn't at fault, but let me just note that Israel has had numerous leaders since 1967 of varying politics, ONE man has ruled the Palestinians.

Hmmm, scenarios where Israel went pro-Soviet? Interesting idea...and I may have TWO ideas for the board.

1) In the early 1950s Israel was more to the left than it is now, and American aid was over a decade away. There was a movement in Israel to help lead the Non-Aligned Movement and use Israel's science, medicine and agriculture to aid the former European colonies. Further, Nassar's coup was seen as the removal of a corrupt puppet by a courageous and progressive officer. It's seldom realized that some IDF officers actually knew Nassar from the war in 1948.
At the same time, England's attitude towards Israel was hostile to the point of being an embarassment today, and actual combat incidents were narrowly averted more than once. This carried over into the 1956 war and cost England dearly.
Let us take these two points and imagine a crucial juncture in the 1956 war:
The UN has asked for a cease-fire and Israel was agreeable, having achieved her goals. ENGLAND was not, since seizure of the Suez Canal was based on the premise of separating warring factions(London actually ordered both sides to withdraw ten miles from the canal, Israel would have needed to ADVANCE another thirty to be this close.) Let us suppose that England was even more verbally abusive on this and/or other topics, and Israel, which owed London nothing and was actually rather angry towards them, decided on a radical move.

Some IDF officer known to Nassar is sent as special envoy to Cairo under flag of truce, not only agreeing to an immediate ceasefire but a unilateral withdrawing of some magnitude(half of Sinai?) In this conversation, Israel makes clear their disgust with England and the feeling that France can do nothing on it's own, and a general sense that the association with the West is not working out. Nassar, sensing an opportunity, agrees and goes so far as to begin negotiating a peace based on a partnership.

The invasion never happens, as the sole basis is gone, and the brutalization of England and France by Eisenhower never occurs. Hmmm, some serious changes right there...

Over the next few years, a peace treaty is signed between Israel and Egypt, and access to Israeli technology and various joint projects brings clear benefit to Egypt. Israel, in turn, receives trade and diplomatic association with many nations, based on Egypt's endorsement. As they begin joint projects designed to also enhance their military independence, an alliance is forged in the early 1960s.

In effect, Egypt is finding a little more independence vis a vis the USSR, given some new alternatives, with Israel as a (junior) partner in a force separate from the US and USSR.

Around 1963 the upheaval in the Arab world occurs as scheduled, but the US and UK are unable to save King Hussein of Jordan, and Jordan becomes the Palestinian homeland WITHIN THE UNITED ARAB REPUBLIC. The advantages to Egypt of having bases and support facilities in Israel are clear, and are what saved the day by winning before the UK could get troops in. The British fade fast while the US is forced to commit a more substantial force earlier to the region(Saudi Arabia? Iran?)

By the 1970s, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Libya are all united under Cairo, while Israel is now a leading member of the Third World, and one of the few known for technological prowess. The partnership bears fruit as the USSR provides generous aid to the allied partnership and Soviet Jews begin to leave, with Moscow's permission.

More desired?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The election of Jimmy Carter to a second term was the key moment. As expected, his greater harshness rapidly crippled relations between the US and Israel, but the consequences were unexpected. Israel was outraged at it's perceived mistreatment, having yielded all of Sinai only to see the reasonable posture presented at Camp David was merely a cover until Carter could secure a second term. The strike at Osirak in 1981 worsened the crisis and forced Israel to begin organizing a massive effort to become self-sufficient in military hardware after Carter froze all aid and weapon sales.

What was not realized, possibly due to incompetence of Stansfield Turner, CIA director and close friend of Carter, was that the Soviet Union was entering a period of serious economic difficulty with no easy way out. The cynical Soviets had an idea.

By establishing a full alliance, releasing Soviet Jews, and providing massive aid, the Soviets would have a beachhead for their master plan: Seize the oil fields of the Middle East, and use this domination of world energy supplies to blackmail Western Europe and Japan for massive transfers of technology and currency to revitalize Soviet science and industry. Having delayed the Reagan build up, Carter would be helpless to stop them, while the addition of IDF forces would be useful as a powerful ally and a useful diversion in the short term. For instance, a crisis was deliberately fomented between Syria and Israel, the USSR sent thousands more troops to 'help', then turned on their former ally! In addition, Saddam Hussein was brought in with a promise of Kuwait and aid in his war against fundamentalist Iran. It was soon realized by Moscow that Israeli weapons technology and the Mossad's ability to 'acquire' more would also be valuable.

From Israel's perspective, Syria would be broken militarily, Iraq and Iran neutralized, massive aid and perhaps a million Soviet Jews received, while the value of Israeli science and the power of Israel's military would render betrayal unlikely. On August 13th 1983 the world was shocked by...

Comments?
 
Siania Thread

Wasn't there a thread on the old board where Isrial is established in the Siania in 1920's?
 
Ian Montgomerie said:
A lot of Jews DID stay in Palestine, historically. It's not like the Diaspora actually involved 99% of the population leaving. IIRC, Jews overseas simply had a higher population growth rate than those left in Palestine, and came to predominate.

They also had a major population boost when the Khazars were converted. A lot of Jews in Russia and Eastern Europe probably trace to that source rather than to the Diaspora.
 
Anthony Appleyard said:
(4) OTL: I read that one of the later Roman or Byzantine emperors let the Jews build a 4th temple. But as the work started there was an eruption of fire from the caves and cisterns below the temple site and the work was abandoned and never restarted. This was likely a sewer gas explosion ignited by a torch (= a piece of burning wood carried by its cold end). Thanks to dirty lazy people dumping their house and street foulness in the first place that comes to hand.
ATL: No sewer gas explosion. The 4th temple is built. Jews return and a Yishuv reforms. Then somewhat like (0) hereinabove.

This was Julian, as part of his anti-Christian policy. See http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/jewish/julian-jews.html

It may have been Julian's death that put an end to the work; it is hard to see the Temple restoration being permitted once Christian rule had been restored under Jovian. You need to prolong Julian's reign and his anti-Christian campaigns for this to work, I think.
 
David Howery said:
so, with the US backing the Arabs, Israel wouldn't last long.. and this would be a good thing?! How long would it be before people here start talking about the "Second Holocaust"..... one that we had a hand in....
I was speaking purely in terms of the spread of communism. It'd be terrible PR, probably.
 
OK

1. Israel someplace else. Maybe some group goes to Australia circa 1600. A Jewish Boer state? A very early Jewish colony in Hollywood, or a very early Jewish Bronx in New York?
2. Nicer Israel run by Yiddish speaking Western European Jews instead of Hebrew speaking Eastern European Jews, ie, by Weizman instead of the Na Zion group from Russia?
3. An Arab nation formed by the Hashemites that gave sanctuary to Jews expelled from Europe after the First World War? The French and British didn't split up the Turkish territory because the Arabs stuck together instead?
 
Top