Federal United Arab Republic?

Deleted member 157939

According to former Vice President of Egypt, Abdel-Latif Al-Boghdadi, Nasser initially supported a federal union for the United Arab Republic. However the threat of a Communist takeover prompted him to support a total union under strict measures. Such measures such as the outlaw of all political parties including the ruling Ba’ath alienated the Syrian political elite. Unprepared to tackle Syrian domestic issues, Nasser would opt to fully integrate Syria in line with the administrative structure of Egypt. This consolidation of authority would severely marginalize the Syrians and pathed the way for very unpopular administrative and economic reforms in Syria. A perception of subordination to the Egyptians would develop, with the influence of Syrian officials severely diminished with power concentrated in Cairo. Increasingly dissatisfied with the very unequal balance of power and Nasserist reforms, a coup by Syrian military officers resulting in Syrian secession would see the demise of the union.

A federal constitution may be able to prevent Egyptian domination of the UAR. Allowing for Syrian control of their domestic affairs could prevent the unpopular set of reforms and the equally unpopular marginalization of Syrian officials (at least on the Provincial level), two factors that contributed to support for the secession. Furthermore Nasser’s demands that determined the formation of the UAR (a plebiscite, outlaw of political parties, curb of military influence in politics, etc) could be altered due to the different nature of the union. As a result the Ba’ath party may not be outlawed, or at least continue to exist on the Provincial level, making the UAR much more amenable to the interests of Syria’s political elites.

A (less Egyptian) federal UAR has very interesting international implications, a longer surviving union could possibly be enlarged with the ascension of Iraq and North Yemen. Libya is very fertile ground for a Pan-Arab revolt, along with Sudan and Jordan. However this may prompt the United States to actively intervene (as in 1958) to prevent the further growth of the UAR.

However a federal system for the UAR does not immediately entail its survival and growth. The degree of power and nature of the Federal government is likely to become an issue of contention, especially with Nasser as Egyptian President. A historical precedent exists for unsuccessful attempts at Pan-Arab federations throughout the 1970s.

In consideration of such, what would the likely implications of a federal constitution for the UAR be?
 
Downfall of the United Arab Republic was due to over-centralization which angered the Syrians and left Nasser isolated in Syria. Avoiding that would save the republic.

A historical precedent exists for unsuccessful attempts at Pan-Arab federations throughout the 1970s.
None of those were actually implanted and in addition lacked a clear leader.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 157939

None of those were actually implanted and in addition lacked a clear leader.
Indeed they were not, yet they demonstrated the lack of cohesion amongst the political leadership of the nations involved. Such an issue could hinder the UAR significantly
 
My timeline, Beauty Before Bedlam, has a surviving United Arab Republic that was established with a federal structure in mind. Multiparty democracy is supported on both sides of the Cold War, so the Ba'athists have competition. Syria and Iraq join around the same time in the 1960s. The monarchy in Jordan is overthrown soon after and joins the union.
 
yet they demonstrated the lack of cohesion amongst the political leadership of the nations involved.
That was due to the fact all the parties involved were one man dictatorships without a clear head. Something not conductive for any potential Union .
 
Last edited:
Top