cj
Seaman
Posts: 11
Likes: 2
|
Post by cj on Oct 9, 2024 7:25:18 GMT
It seems to me that there would still probably be some kind of islamist backlash in southern Lebanon but I am not sure how much support syria would give it (in OTL they mostly just let iran handle it to avoid fighting israel again while still forcing them out) and I'm not sure such a movement would even be around today without a foreign backer.
|
|
|
|
Post by simon darkshade on Oct 9, 2024 12:00:41 GMT
Without a foreign supporter, it is unlikely for any organisation to exist in a comparable form.
|
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Oct 9, 2024 13:11:01 GMT
Agreed, but that raises the follow-up questions:
Without Iran and Syria in combination backing Hezbollah, and that group becoming increasingly effective in wearying Israel in Lebanon over the course of the 1990s, Israel's endgame in Lebanon will be something different from unilateral withdrawal. At any point between 1985 and 2005 it might instead have been a negotiated withdrawal, involving a peace agreement or nonbelligerency agreement with the central Lebanese government, or a permanent occupation of the south Lebanon security zone in the absence of an agreement, to this day. Or worse, an annexation and settler movement. What do you see happening here?
Regardless, with no successful resistance in Lebanon and no foreign countries backing Hezbollah or Hamas resistance to oppose the Israelis or provide any kind of deterrent counter-force to the Israelis, what kind of expansionist and annexationist or expulsionist schemes would the Israeli governments have become emboldened to do at what points over the 1990s and 2000s in what land in the Middle East region, that they were not doing any way in real history between the 1980s and 2024?
|
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Oct 9, 2024 13:14:35 GMT
Lack of a Hezbollah success provides less inspiration for Hamas to apply a similar model in Gaza and the West Bank. And with Iran not being an Islamic Fundamentalist regime getting practice in supporting the Hezbollah resistance model, Iran will not get drawn in as a supporter to Hamas attempting to follow any similar models in the occupied territories. But none of this will stop the street-level preteen and teen stone-throwing Intifadeh of the late 1980s.
|
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Oct 9, 2024 13:16:29 GMT
The Amal Shiite sectarian militia in Lebanon would already exist under the Nabih Berri family.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Member is Online
Posts: 24,832 
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Oct 9, 2024 19:07:53 GMT
A lot might depend on why Iran avoids revolution. Presuming you mean the monarchy remains in power but under what conditions? However an imperial or even a constitutional monarchy of some form is likely to stay friendly to Israel rather than a bitter enemy. Also this probably means no Iran-Iraq war - unless you have an Iranian attack into Iraq to distract attention from the regimes problems? If no such war then a hell of a lot changes in the wider ME. Saddam probably stays close to the Soviets which could leave him isolated once it collapses but again without the exhausting war with Iran he's probably not facing the problems that prompted the invasion of Kuwait.
From the other side the Israelis were initially welcomed by the Shia's when they invaded S Lebanon in 1980-81. The Shia's were a distinctly oppressed group who had 3rd place in Lebanon after the Christians and Sunnis and had seen much of their territory come under control of Palestinian groups who treated them poorly. Not sure why they and Israel fell out but with the chief Shia power [Iran] still fairly friendly to Israel you could see them becoming proxies for Israel as the Lebanese Christians and Druze did. Which would rather isolate the Sunni Muslims from power and as OTL force the Palestinians out. This might prompt some reaction from Syria but then the Baath state there is largely a minority group so what happens here?
On the basic issue I suspect that Hezbollah or some other deeply radicalized Shia group is far less likely to emerge.
|
|
|
|
Post by raharris1973 on Oct 10, 2024 3:23:45 GMT
Also this probably means no Iran-Iraq war - unless you have an Iranian attack into Iraq to distract attention from the regimes problems? If no such war then a hell of a lot changes in the wider ME. Saddam probably stays close to the Soviets which could leave him isolated once it collapses but again without the exhausting war with Iran he's probably not facing the problems that prompted the invasion of Kuwait. Yes. This is a big deal, and the consequences are much wider than just changes to Lebanon. Iraq should face much less destruction and have a much higher standard of living, closer to its southern Gulf neighbors, and possibly could be further along demographic transition to lower birthrates. Saddam, despite imposing fear and repression, could also have more genuine support without the costs and strains of war. His *motives* and urgency to grab Kuwait would be removed even if raw capability and historic temptation would remain. Saddam's own oil revenues would enable him to weather the loss of Soviet support fairly easily. From the other side the Israelis were initially welcomed by the Shia's when they invaded S Lebanon in 1980-81. The Shia's were a distinctly oppressed group who had 3rd place in Lebanon after the Christians and Sunnis and had seen much of their territory come under control of Palestinian groups who treated them poorly. Not sure why they and Israel fell out but with the chief Shia power [Iran] still fairly friendly to Israel you could see them becoming proxies for Israel as the Lebanese Christians and Druze did. Which would rather isolate the Sunni Muslims from power and as OTL force the Palestinians out. They probably fell out because the Israelis stayed too long, past the point that the Shia felt the main PLO/Palestinian threat had been dealt with, and after Iranian influence and provocations had grown. But you are right that are first south Lebanese Shia largely collaborated, as much as south Lebanese Christians. Both sects probably made up foot soldiers of the Israeli backed South Lebanon Army at first. Survivors of the Sabra and Chatila Palestinian refugee camp massacre, although it was conducted by Lebanese Phalangist forces under the command of the Maronite Christian Gemayel's have remarked that they heard several of the perpetrating soldiers speak with "Shi'a accents" which is apparently a thing. |
|
