Alternate history is one of my favorite topics, and I’m curious to hear your thoughts.

  • Mrkawfee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Literally every problem in the Middle East stems from the Zionist colony established by the Western imperialists and the subsequent Cold War between the US and Soviet Union.

    Assuming the Sykes Picot division held and pro Western monarchies in Iraq, Egypt and Iran remained in power, what reason would there be for military coups to depose Western monarchs? Without Soviet support and the threat of Israel, what would be propelling Arab nationalism in the 1950s?

    The axis powers had very little interest in the Middle East prior to 1939. Hitler wanted Lebensraum in Russia and Italy was interested in Africa. There’s no reason to believe they would start wars in the region if the Gulf Monarchies were willing to sell them oil.

    In this hypothetical reality, I’d imagine the Middle East would largely be run by monarchies, with deep ties to Germany and Italy.

    • dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      24 hours ago

      Literally every problem in the Middle East stems from the Zionist colony established by the imperialists

      The Middle East has had problems for thousands of years before the state of Israel got established. Its strategic location between Africa and Asia caused Palestine to be conquered by the Egyptians, Babylonians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, European crusaders, Arabs again, Ottomans and the British Empire. Three major religions see Jerusalem as a sacred place and have fought wars over it.

      Zionism is definitely a major reason for the problems we have in our timeline but assuming there would be no problems at all seems overly simplistic.

      Also, the Axis winning the war does not guarantee that Israel won’t get established. There would still be hundreds of thousands of Jews who flee from Europe and need somewhere to live. The Axis, being the cause of the problem, wouldn’t be interested in solving it and the rest of the world has basically the same options as in our timeline.

      The axis powers had no interest in the Middle East prior to 1939 and there’s no reason to believe they would start wars in the region if The Gulf Monarchies were willing to sell them oil.

      I could very well see them trying to stay mostly neutral and selling oil to everyone. Profit is more important than ideology, especially if food and water are scarce. But even in real life, that hasn’t kept superpowers from finding excuses to attack oil-rich nations.

      • Mrkawfee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        24 hours ago

        It’s easy to think that the Middle East is chaotic because of what’s going on now but the region was at peace for over 500 years under Ottoman Rule.

        Western Imperialism and Israel are the reason the region is a mess.

        • dfyx@lemmy.helios42.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          23 hours ago

          It’s easy to think that the Middle East is chaotic because of what’s going on now but the region was at peace for over 500 years under Ottoman Rule.

          No doubt on that point.

          But the Ottoman Empire ended a solid 30 years before Israel got established. To prevent the problems the region has now, different choices would have been necessary after WW1, not just WW2. For the purpose of a “What happens if WW2 ends differently” thread, that chance has already passed. The British Mandate has been established and there are already enough Jewish immigrants to have caused the 1936-39 Arab revolt and hundreds of thousands of Jews have already fled Europe. The Axis winning WW2 would probably put even more pressure on the Allies to let Jewish refugees live in Palestine because sending them back to Europe is not just an unattractive option, it’s outright impossible.