• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

WI: Saddam dies in 2001

That's a good question, Saddam dropping dead  could be used as a way to reach out to Iraq and offer to ease up the sanctions if the country does X, Y, and Z. It could be harder to get the US public to back war without Saddam (a long-time and deserved bogeyman) as the target, depending on how his successor acts.

OTOH if Iraq starts to come apart under new leadership, might be easier to get away with invading? "Look what the Hussein sons are doing, you want THEM with WMDs" or something
 
Does a major war in the Middle East potentially butterfly 9/11? I know planning was already under way but Al Qaeda might be more interested in gaining a power base than striking at the West.
 
Is a Uday-Qusay civil war just as much a non-starter as the N. Korean succession crisis which.... never happened in OTL?

Honestly, probably, did they actually have like different societal bases of support or was it an inter-elite shitfest? Former maybe, latter we jsut get a nasty coup and maybe the war fever dies down if the winner is better at not making too many anti-US noises.
 
It’s been a while since I looked at any of this, but I never had the impression that either of Saddam’s sons had an independent power base of their own. Saddam would not have liked the idea of anyone having a power base-if I recall correctly, at least one of them was involved with the army, but was completely incompetent in that role. The Iraqi Perspective Project report can be found online and it has some very sharp things to say about Saddam’s son when it came to his military competence. People like Saddam survive because they refuse to permit anyone to develop power bases that could be turned against them.

If Saddam dies without warning, without any time to name a heir, I think Iraq would likely fall down into civil war. There would be too many senior people afraid of what would happen if their rivals gained the top spot and would try to seize it for themselves. Very few of the administration were completely neutral and those who were – Comical Ali, for example - were never seen as threats. Ali was a Shia Muslim and I think they were a couple or so who were Christians. Saddam’s strongmen were just too divided to come up with any sort of compromise and, of course, both the Shia and Kurds would want independence.

The United States had a plan - Operation Desert Crossing - for invading Iraq if Saddam fell and the country collapsed into chaos. It is unclear if that plan could be put into action in ATL - on one hand, a lot of powers would want the chaos contained as much as possible; on the other, there will be no great justification for invasion and a lot of other powers would be concerned about the United States running up in de facto control of Iraq. Iran would certainly meddle by sending weapons and troops, open or covert, into Basra; the Saudis and Turks would be inclined to interfere too. The plan for Iraqi Freedom had yet to be devised, so I suspect there would be a considerable delay between the decision to intervene and the tanks rolling over the border. The United States had a considerable amount of pre-positioned weapons and material in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, but they will be delays in linking up the troops with their gear. There would also be a great deal less support for the war, in the absence of 9/11.

I think it is quite likely there would be a major insurgency, along the lines of the one we saw in OTL. The Shia would want their demographic right - rule of Iraq - and the Kurds would at the very least want autonomy. The Iranians would stir the pot, as would Saudi Arabia - fewer restraints in this timeline, particularly if US doesn’t get involved - Syria and Taliban Afghanistan/AQ. How it would work out is difficult to say.

Chris
 
Qusay was in charge of the Fedayeen Saddam, but the problem is the Fedayeen are from a military standpoint dogshit (massacring Shia women and children don't count), it took ad-Douri to whip them up as a nucleus for the Early Insurgency. Qusay is smart, but not that smart.

By 2001 Uday was in the doghouse politically after the Kamel Hanna incident. He's too ill and too fucking crazy at this point to have a reasonable powerbase.

Maybe Douri might take power, only for everything to go to hell in a handbasket. Though I think civil war is unlikely. More likely we get the 60s and 70s again with revolving-door military coups, plus or minus a Kurdish insurgency or two.
 
I mean to be blunt, a lot of the "well we'd invade because of civil war" claims are just wishful thinking to try and justify the objectively bad idea of invading Iraq in 2003. I think the realistic probability is that barring some very weird shit that makes Iraqi oil much more important for someone to secure, the outcome of Saddam dying is that the US stops caring because there's no personal pique involved and the people who would invade based on their 90s experiences have all died or retired. So it just becomes another vaguely unstable blob on the map that only dorks know about for most Americans.
 
I mean to be blunt, a lot of the "well we'd invade because of civil war" claims are just wishful thinking to try and justify the objectively bad idea of invading Iraq in 2003. I think the realistic probability is that barring some very weird shit that makes Iraqi oil much more important for someone to secure, the outcome of Saddam dying is that the US stops caring because there's no personal pique involved and the people who would invade based on their 90s experiences have all died or retired. So it just becomes another vaguely unstable blob on the map that only dorks know about for most Americans.

You might be right <grin>

On the other hand, there are few good outcomes if Iraq does collapse into civil war. The Iranians will certainly back the Shia, posing a horrific threat to Saudi Arabia and the global economy; radical Sunni factions will draw in AQ and other radicals; the Turks might consider invading North Iraq to snatch the oil and prevent the formation of an independent Kurdish state...

Chris
 
You might be right <grin>

On the other hand, there are few good outcomes if Iraq does collapse into civil war. The Iranians will certainly back the Shia, posing a horrific threat to Saudi Arabia and the global economy; radical Sunni factions will draw in AQ and other radicals; the Turks might consider invading North Iraq to snatch the oil and prevent the formation of an independent Kurdish state...

Chris
On the latter, I don't think the Peshmerga is going to just sit and take being invaded by the literal Turkish Army.
 
Back
Top