What would it take for the major Muslim countries, run by Islamist or Islamist-friendly governments, to create a Pan-Islamist bloc that can at least challenge (probably not outright win in a total war, more like win in a proxy war) the other major alliances like the Warsaw Pact/Comintern and NATO/Western Europe/Imperialist powers with a POD/PODs after 1900? Not only should they be militarily strong, but Islamism should have a lot of support around the Muslim world as a form of soft power. My ideas are below.
I think Egypt, Turkey/Ottomans, Arabia, and Pakistan/a Muslim Indian state are the bare minimum necessary. Iran and other Arab, North African, sub-Saharan, and Southeast Asian states would be welcome as well. At the start of the century, the Ottomans were the only Muslim country I can think of with the industry and military to somewhat challenge a European power, so I think having Turkey in the bloc is a must, not only for the industrial and military capacity, but because otherwise the bloc will become Arab-dominated and that will just be pan-Arabism.
My first major point of concern is whether or not the Ottomans should survive. If they don't, Turkey will likely follow a path like OTL and be hostile to Islamism. If they do, the POD(s) will probably have to make the Young Turk Revolution fail or 1909 countercoup succeed so Abdulhamid II can stay in power and the CUP won't be able to implement secularization and nationalism. A way to have some of the big names like Mustafa Kemal Pasha and Ismail Enver Pasha removed from the equation is have them die in the Italo-Turkish War. With Abdulhamid II in power, the Ottomans will likely not enter WWI and remain relatively stable. On the other hand, Abdulhamid would be seen as part of the old unjust and autocratic system, a symbol of jahiliyyah, by some Islamic modernists and revivalists, as well as all the separatist groups. A constitutional monarchy would be needed and the Islamists rather than nationalists and liberals would have to gain power, or Abdulhamid's successor would have to wholeheartedly support the Islamic revivalist cause. Also, the Ottomans and their Caliphate surviving would undoubtedly butterfly away or drastically change other Islamist movements, conflicts, and individuals down the line, leaving the rest to be way more speculative.
Another thing is the Saudis. Their spread of Wahhabism in OTL has caused a lot of issues with Muslim unity, so a surviving Ottomans could solve that by supporting the more tolerant Rashidis to defeat them. The Rashidis had a history of messy successions, so this could also become favorable later down the line when an Islamist Revolution supported by some members of the royal family could occur during a succession struggle, overthrowing the monarchy and establishing an Islamic State in Arabia. This could also apply if the Saudis remain in power, but it would be harder.
On to Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood should take power around the 1940s/1950s. Sayyid Qutb was a bit too anti-Western, sensationalist, and willing to support violence (also he has a Hitler moustache :/), so he would quickly be toppled by hostile powers. Hassan al-Banna, a school teacher and more humanitarian, would be more agreeable and well liked, so his assassination would have to be averted.
Pakistan would be an anchor in the east to tie the bloc together with another big non-Arab nation so that pan-Arabism's hold is loosened further and more military and industrial power is added to the bloc's pool. Jamaat-e-Islami under Maududi should come into power by the 70s.
Another big thing to consider is Israel. With the Ottomans staying, Israel would probably not exist, although a similar Druze-Maronite state in Lebanon could be forcefully established in the chaos by France and the UK as the inevitable onslaught of nationalism takes over the world post-WWII and Syrians, Iraqis, and Hejazis demand independence from the Ottomans. If Israel does end up existing, it could be a rallying cry for the Muslim world to fight against, but in OTL, this just encouraged pan-Arabists and secular dictators backed by the Soviets to come into power.
The impetus for the creation of the bloc would be shared hostility among the members to both Western imperialists and communists as well as desire for greater Muslim unity against secularism. As the Cold War progresses, the Islamist bloc's military actions will be in proxy wars against these two enemies.
Speaking of communists, I had an idea for the Tudeh Party in Iran to take power in an officer coup with Soviet backing around 1946. This could put the Sunni-Shia conflict on hold as now some of the Iranian clergy fleeing abroad would be supported by neighboring Islamist states. A sort of warming of relations and mutual understanding could take place in order to topple the communist government and establish a friendly Islamic state in Iran.
Today I was also reading about Korenizatsiya, where the Soviets initially encouraged the different nationalities to embrace their own languages and natives running their own republics, rather than being Russified. This could help the Islamists gain influence in the Central Asian republics if the Soviet Union collapses because they will potentially retain more of their language and culture and not be so Russified like they are in OTL. To keep this policy, Stalin would have to keep supporting it like he did initially, or be replaced by someone else. That someone else could also keep supporting World Communism, which would provide a greater existential threat to non-communist nations and thus influence more Muslims to turn to Islamism.
Going back to WWI, the Ottomans not joining could possibly shorten the war enough for the US not to join, leaving it more isolationist and less likely to back up European powers in their pro-imperialist actions post-WWII. A more isolationist US could also be subtly more conservative, making it more willing later on to back fiercely anti-communist Islamist countries and insurgent groups in the Cold War.
Also about China: it may be more beneficial for the Nationalists to win the civil war. The loyalty of the Ma clique and shared anti-imperialist and anti-communist sentiment between the KMT and Muslim countries would draw them closer together. The RoC may also become an observer in TTL's equivalent of the OIC.
These are the general ideas I have thought of over the past few days. Please by all means poke holes in them and suggest your own. I have also included a rough draft map taking place around 1990 of the major blocs incorporating some of my ideas. An influx of nations would seek to join the OIS after the 89/90s Revolutions.
I think Egypt, Turkey/Ottomans, Arabia, and Pakistan/a Muslim Indian state are the bare minimum necessary. Iran and other Arab, North African, sub-Saharan, and Southeast Asian states would be welcome as well. At the start of the century, the Ottomans were the only Muslim country I can think of with the industry and military to somewhat challenge a European power, so I think having Turkey in the bloc is a must, not only for the industrial and military capacity, but because otherwise the bloc will become Arab-dominated and that will just be pan-Arabism.
My first major point of concern is whether or not the Ottomans should survive. If they don't, Turkey will likely follow a path like OTL and be hostile to Islamism. If they do, the POD(s) will probably have to make the Young Turk Revolution fail or 1909 countercoup succeed so Abdulhamid II can stay in power and the CUP won't be able to implement secularization and nationalism. A way to have some of the big names like Mustafa Kemal Pasha and Ismail Enver Pasha removed from the equation is have them die in the Italo-Turkish War. With Abdulhamid II in power, the Ottomans will likely not enter WWI and remain relatively stable. On the other hand, Abdulhamid would be seen as part of the old unjust and autocratic system, a symbol of jahiliyyah, by some Islamic modernists and revivalists, as well as all the separatist groups. A constitutional monarchy would be needed and the Islamists rather than nationalists and liberals would have to gain power, or Abdulhamid's successor would have to wholeheartedly support the Islamic revivalist cause. Also, the Ottomans and their Caliphate surviving would undoubtedly butterfly away or drastically change other Islamist movements, conflicts, and individuals down the line, leaving the rest to be way more speculative.
Another thing is the Saudis. Their spread of Wahhabism in OTL has caused a lot of issues with Muslim unity, so a surviving Ottomans could solve that by supporting the more tolerant Rashidis to defeat them. The Rashidis had a history of messy successions, so this could also become favorable later down the line when an Islamist Revolution supported by some members of the royal family could occur during a succession struggle, overthrowing the monarchy and establishing an Islamic State in Arabia. This could also apply if the Saudis remain in power, but it would be harder.
On to Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood should take power around the 1940s/1950s. Sayyid Qutb was a bit too anti-Western, sensationalist, and willing to support violence (also he has a Hitler moustache :/), so he would quickly be toppled by hostile powers. Hassan al-Banna, a school teacher and more humanitarian, would be more agreeable and well liked, so his assassination would have to be averted.
Pakistan would be an anchor in the east to tie the bloc together with another big non-Arab nation so that pan-Arabism's hold is loosened further and more military and industrial power is added to the bloc's pool. Jamaat-e-Islami under Maududi should come into power by the 70s.
Another big thing to consider is Israel. With the Ottomans staying, Israel would probably not exist, although a similar Druze-Maronite state in Lebanon could be forcefully established in the chaos by France and the UK as the inevitable onslaught of nationalism takes over the world post-WWII and Syrians, Iraqis, and Hejazis demand independence from the Ottomans. If Israel does end up existing, it could be a rallying cry for the Muslim world to fight against, but in OTL, this just encouraged pan-Arabists and secular dictators backed by the Soviets to come into power.
The impetus for the creation of the bloc would be shared hostility among the members to both Western imperialists and communists as well as desire for greater Muslim unity against secularism. As the Cold War progresses, the Islamist bloc's military actions will be in proxy wars against these two enemies.
Speaking of communists, I had an idea for the Tudeh Party in Iran to take power in an officer coup with Soviet backing around 1946. This could put the Sunni-Shia conflict on hold as now some of the Iranian clergy fleeing abroad would be supported by neighboring Islamist states. A sort of warming of relations and mutual understanding could take place in order to topple the communist government and establish a friendly Islamic state in Iran.
Today I was also reading about Korenizatsiya, where the Soviets initially encouraged the different nationalities to embrace their own languages and natives running their own republics, rather than being Russified. This could help the Islamists gain influence in the Central Asian republics if the Soviet Union collapses because they will potentially retain more of their language and culture and not be so Russified like they are in OTL. To keep this policy, Stalin would have to keep supporting it like he did initially, or be replaced by someone else. That someone else could also keep supporting World Communism, which would provide a greater existential threat to non-communist nations and thus influence more Muslims to turn to Islamism.
Going back to WWI, the Ottomans not joining could possibly shorten the war enough for the US not to join, leaving it more isolationist and less likely to back up European powers in their pro-imperialist actions post-WWII. A more isolationist US could also be subtly more conservative, making it more willing later on to back fiercely anti-communist Islamist countries and insurgent groups in the Cold War.
Also about China: it may be more beneficial for the Nationalists to win the civil war. The loyalty of the Ma clique and shared anti-imperialist and anti-communist sentiment between the KMT and Muslim countries would draw them closer together. The RoC may also become an observer in TTL's equivalent of the OIC.
These are the general ideas I have thought of over the past few days. Please by all means poke holes in them and suggest your own. I have also included a rough draft map taking place around 1990 of the major blocs incorporating some of my ideas. An influx of nations would seek to join the OIS after the 89/90s Revolutions.
Last edited: