Zionists in the Sinai

[Jackson Lennock]

What if the 1903/1904 Zionist proposal to set up a settlement in El Arish (Sinai) had gotten the go ahead from the British? The Zionists weren't politically savvy at the time. They submitted a report to the British focused on the ecological feasibility, but didn't realize they should have been focused on fiscal practicalities if they wanted to win over the British.

I came across this map on Reddit, which gave me the idea for this post.




The Anglo-Ottoman Border negotiation in 1906 saw the British first propose a line from between Rafah and Gaza City to the southernmost point of the Dead Sea. I suppose in this case, they might try for a similar line. See below - a line straight from the Mediterranean (between Gaza and Rafah) due east to the Dead Sea.

 

[Jackson Lennock]

A possible three-stage settlement of the Sinai.

In Blue is the first settlements in the El Arish area, along the Rafah Plain. This would include a more favorable border drawn with the Ottomans. I drew a line slightly different from above. Here, there is a line from the southernmost point of the northern portions of the Dead Sea. It extends west to the Mediterranean until reaching the Wadi that flows into the Mediterranean and proceeds to follow the Wadi to the Med as the border.

Modern Beersheba was only founded in 1899 as a garrison. The Ottomans wouldn't be pleased to lose it, but at this point the Ottomans aren't really losing much. The border here essentially follows the southernmost portion of the useful part of Palestine for Ottoman purposes.


In Purple is the second settlements along the remainder of the Mediterranean coast. This area has more irrigation due to the canal which is constructed to Rafah. Purple also includes further expansion inland along the Wadis, and some sporadic settlements in the Negev and Sinai (Dimona, Dead Sea Coast, Masada, etc.) Eilat-Taba also is set up as a port, which the British enjoy since there's now a second transit route to complement the Suez Canal. It also is a nice garrison for the British, given the Ottoman garrison next door in Aqaba. Purple also includes a settlement around the coal mine in North Sinai and a railroad from it to El Arish (which would be the site of "Tel Aviv" here).

Red is a few more coastal cities in the South Sinai to bolster the Aqaba shipping trade. I marked off the historic locations of Israeli settlements in the Sinai. Red also includes Nekhel, a significant transit point through the Sinai with a historic fortress.





Much of the OTL Zionist migration to Palestine would end up in Sinai here instead.

 

[raharris1973]

Much of the OTL Zionist migration to Palestine would end up in Sinai here instead.

And likely be absolutely excluded from the adjacent Ottoman provinces by Ottoman government policy and grassroots local sentiment alike.

 

[Charles EP M.]

First thought is that if Britain formally agrees "this chunk of land is Jewish now", that makes things a bit simpler than Palestine: instead of juggling Arab and Jewish interests, Britain has come down on one side. Which isn't fun for any Arabs living on the wrong side of the line and will likely go wrong but in a different way to OTL

 

[frustrated progressive]

This is all very interesting, but I can't help but feel that the Sinai is just too close to the Land of Israel for anyone's comfort.
Inasmuch as any support existed for Zionist schemes away from the Land, distance served to clearly demarcate this new settlement project from the dream of returning to the Holy Land, as a distinct thing. But to establish a Jewish state right next to their ancestral homeland would seem to make the Sinai look like a direct and inferior substitute, while it leaves the Arabs (who'd already be smarting about losing the Sinai) paranoid that the Israelis would try to just move the border a bit north.

 

[raharris1973]

This is all very interesting, but I can't help but feel that the Sinai is just too close to the Land of Israel for anyone's comfort.
Inasmuch as any support existed for Zionist schemes away from the Land, distance served to clearly demarcate this new settlement project from the dream of returning to the Holy Land, as a distinct thing. But to establish a Jewish state right next to their ancestral homeland would seem to make the Sinai look like a direct and inferior substitute, while it leaves the Arabs (who'd already be smarting about losing the Sinai) paranoid that the Israelis would try to just move the border a bit north.

Practical effects? Loose talk on the Jewish Zionist side about building up settlement and an army in Sinai for a perfect post Exodus ‘40 years’, to be followed by a war to seize Jerusalem and and the rest of the promised land beyond?

Meanwhile, Ottomans reorient to see British as biggest threat, and Jews as suspect minority rise to equal or surpass Armenians. Ottomans lean on German protection, or eve Russian! Against British designs?

 

[Jackson Lennock]

First thought is that if Britain formally agrees "this chunk of land is Jewish now", that makes things a bit simpler than Palestine: instead of juggling Arab and Jewish interests, Britain has come down on one side. Which isn't fun for any Arabs living on the wrong side of the line and will likely go wrong but in a different way to OTL

A thought I've had is that when Britain divided the mandate between Transjordan and Cisjordan, perhaps they didn't make Jordan big enough. The main Arab population centers were Nablus, Jenin, Acre, and in the Galilee - ergo, the highlands without malarial issues and more natural rain capture. When the Damascus/Hijaz railway was constructed, it integrated the traditionally inhabited northern portions of the region.

Perhaps rather than promising Palestine to the Zionists, the British just promise Judea? Ergo, the attachment of the Jerusalem Mutessarifat and the to the preexisting Jewish colony. Jerusalem city (not the sanjak though) was already Jewish majority from the mid-19th century onward.




Something like this. I dialed down the Zionist Sinai settlement to east of El Arish, with the border following the Wadi until a line analogous to the OTL Sinai-Negev border toward Nuweiba. Then before reaching the coast, it extends toward the mouth of the Sinai. Also, exclaves at Jaffa and Al Aqsa/part-of-old-city. I assume Haifa as part of "Judea" because Britain wanted her naval base there.

 

[raharris1973]

A thought I've had is that when Britain divided the mandate between Transjordan and Cisjordan, perhaps they didn't make Jordan big enough. The main Arab population centers were Nablus, Jenin, Acre, and in the Galilee - ergo, the highlands without malarial issues and more natural rain capture. When the Damascus/Hijaz railway was constructed, it integrated the traditionally inhabited northern portions of the region.

Perhaps rather than promising Palestine to the Zionists, the British just promise Judea? Ergo, the attachment of the Jerusalem Mutessarifat and the to the preexisting Jewish colony. Jerusalem city (not the sanjak though) was already Jewish majority from the mid-19th century onward.

View attachment 74502


Something like this. I dialed down the Zionist Sinai settlement to east of El Arish, with the border following the Wadi until a line analogous to the OTL Sinai-Negev border toward Nuweiba. Then before reaching the coast, it extends toward the mouth of the Sinai. Also, exclaves at Jaffa and Al Aqsa/part-of-old-city. I assume Haifa as part of "Judea" because Britain wanted her naval base there.

View attachment 74506

Now somehow avoid having the Egyptians as your forever enemy which means somehow making the Egyptians feel their nation lost anythin out of this, and you're cookin'.

 

[raharris1973]

A thought I've had is that when Britain divided the mandate between Transjordan and Cisjordan, perhaps they didn't make Jordan big enough. The main Arab population centers were Nablus, Jenin, Acre, and in the Galilee - ergo, the highlands without malarial issues and more natural rain capture. When the Damascus/Hijaz railway was constructed, it integrated the traditionally inhabited northern portions of the region.

Perhaps rather than promising Palestine to the Zionists, the British just promise Judea? Ergo, the attachment of the Jerusalem Mutessarifat and the to the preexisting Jewish colony. Jerusalem city (not the sanjak though) was already Jewish majority from the mid-19th century onward.

View attachment 74502


Something like this. I dialed down the Zionist Sinai settlement to east of El Arish, with the border following the Wadi until a line analogous to the OTL Sinai-Negev border toward Nuweiba. Then before reaching the coast, it extends toward the mouth of the Sinai. Also, exclaves at Jaffa and Al Aqsa/part-of-old-city. I assume Haifa as part of "Judea" because Britain wanted her naval base there.

View attachment 74506

If you get a Sinai-Negev settlement thing going in earnest from 1904-06, and the British government voices full support, it could see much development and significant population increase, certainly a Jewish majority and a local defense force, by 1914. I say this based on the sheer volume of European Jewish emigration from 1904-1914, and all provided British endorsement/protection and the Tsarist pogroms are enough to inspire grassroots, cross-class Jewish collaboration to get this done [lower and middle class migrants and labor, wealthy financing about what governments or parliaments would commit, financial oversight to keep things honest].

A run-away success in that pre-WWI decade will create a fiscal and strategic asset for Britain, and I don't think the Muslim world backlash would approach the severity of backlash to the 1948 war. But there will be alarm in Ottoman and Islamic quarters about this growing colony. And predictable backlash includes close-guarding of existing Zionist settlement in Ottoman Palestine, spontaneous anti-Jewish rioting there and possible expulsion, as well as pogroms elsewhere in the Ottoman empire against local Jewry including in Jerusalem, Aleppo, Baghdad, Tripoli Constantinople and even Salonika.

Could the Ottomans and Russian Empire come to a rapprochement based on anti-British and anti-Jewish sentiment? Both use it to protect their respective rear flanks and pacify internal Muslim and Orthodox minorities.

Or if Russo-Ottoman conflict is irrepressible, the Russians start to see Jews as an additional anti-Ottoman instrument, encouraging Jewish loyalty and service with Ottoman atrocity stories, sending Jewish troops to the Ottoman front, allowing Russian Jewish subjects abroad to serve in British forces with the Jewish Dominion abroad instead of returning home for service?

 

[Jackson Lennock]

I'm not sure how invested Egypt was in controlling Sinai. The exact placing of the border had been an open question for nearly a century when Britain and Turkey mostly resolved it in 1906 (later adjusted somewhat in 1918). And I am unsure how invested the Egyptians were in getting this or that portion of the Sinai at the time. The "not one inch" attitude seen at Camp David was a product of a later postcolonial attitude.




Theoretically, if Egypt's loss of Sinai or part of Sinai was coupled with something else (like complete control of Sudan) that might make a difference. Recall that the Egypt-Ottoman border was theoretically an internal border of the Ottoman Empire until 1914. What the borders are of a state that would be newly declared would be looser/more malleable than Egypt being demanded to endure border changes to recognized international lines later.