Allied Italy in WW2

https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=304673
In reality, Italy joined the Axis in WW2. While unlikely and not a frequent topic, this examines the consequences of an Allied Fascist Italy [with a pod of 1939].
The timeline would be more narrative compared to the chronological format of the above.
Although Mussolini,the fascist dictator of Italy since his coup d’état in 1922 and had strong imperialist ambitions for Italy, his initial policy towards Germany, including Nazi Germany, was with contempt and dislike for the German threat. He in fact, supported Fascist Austria as a bulwark against Nazi Germany initially. But, by launching of a war of aggression against Abyssinia in 1935, relations between both France and Britain on one hand and Italy on the other had deteriorated after this war and Italy became closer to Berlin and leading to the formation of Berlin-Rome Axis, an unofficial alliance between Nazi-Germany and Fascist Italy. Jealous of the successes of his colleague, Mussolini invaded Albania to present him with a fait accompli for once.
On 1 September 1939, WW2 began with the Nazi invasion of Poland. The Germans, since the Treaty of Versailles, had longed for reclaiming lost lands and avenge the humiliations of the treaty inflicted on them by the Entente. The Nazis, who ruled Germany since 1933, wanted to solve German land and economic problems and despite their bigotry, proved popular among the Germans. They retook the Rhineland, Austria and Czechoslovakia. Initially, Britain and France tolerated and agreed to Hitler's actions, but after invading Czechoslovakia, became less trustworthy of Hitler.
Within 2 days of the Nazi invasion of Poland , Britain and France, who were treaty bound to assist Poland, declared war on Nazi Germany. As German forces clashed across the western Polish border, invaded from East Prussia and the Carpathians and Tatras with limited aid from Slovakian forces to the south, Mussolini watched. German forces pulled off mass encirclements and after the Soviet attack on September 17th, Poland was doomed since their retreat to the ‘Romanian Bridgehead’ to await Anglo-French reinforcements became impossible with the need to defend eastern Poland and Soviet attempts at cutting off the Polish Army remnants from the south. In October, Polish forces were defeated on the Vistula river and Warsaw fell into German hands. Poland had been defeated in little over five weeks, a major military success and a blow to Britain and France.
However, events over the next few months would change Mussolini's mind. Ironically, he would be fighting for the democracies rather than for his ally.
[1st pod would be the Pact of Steel is delayed in signing.]
 
Last edited:
1939 Italy basically had no reason to join the Allies. The Pact of Steel was signed in 1939, but the basis for its creation were laid way before, earlier as Mussolini's 1922 march on Rome. Also, in 1939 Italy was already involved in the Spanish Civil War alongside Nazi Germany, so it really makes little sense that they drop out of this alliance to join France and Great Britain (which was one of the main targets of the fascist propaganda) against Germany.

The scenario surely looks interesting, but I would rather choose a different POD. A good one may be October 29, 1922, after the march on Rome: King Victor Emmanuel III refuses to allow Mussolini to form a government and civil unrests break out. The Fascist movement might have been crushed quite easily at this point, as many politicians and common people were still quite scared by the violence the movement was being built upon.
 
If we push the PoD back to before the Italo-Abyssinian War and Hitler doing something really stupid regarding Austria, this might be more possible.
 
1939 Italy basically had no reason to join the Allies. The Pact of Steel was signed in 1939, but the basis for its creation were laid way before, earlier as Mussolini's 1922 march on Rome. Also, in 1939 Italy was already involved in the Spanish Civil War alongside Nazi Germany, so it really makes little sense that they drop out of this alliance to join France and Great Britain (which was one of the main targets of the fascist propaganda) against Germany.

The scenario surely looks interesting, but I would rather choose a different POD. A good one may be October 29, 1922, after the march on Rome: King Victor Emmanuel III refuses to allow Mussolini to form a government and civil unrests break out. The Fascist movement might have been crushed quite easily at this point, as many politicians and common people were still quite scared by the violence the movement was being built upon.
This is the introduction. I think Allied bribes with the Mediterranean territory Italy wanted, plus possible increase in pro Allied/anti German sentiment, while very unlikely, still does the trick. Perhaps an incident a German U boat sinks an Italian passenger liner or battleship with heavy loss of life combined with heavy loss of life and Allied sympathy, which might result in the Allies willing to give Italy territory to get him on the Allied side might do the trick, although barely. Or Mussolini and/or the pro German Fascists dying in 1939 or early 1940 and the pro Allied Fascists taking power and declaring war on Germany might also do the trick [if they're rabid anti Nazi/German and probably suspect Mussolini's death might be the work of Germans covertly].
 
If we push the PoD back to before the Italo-Abyssinian War and Hitler doing something really stupid regarding Austria, this might be more possible.
The problem is, with a pre 1935 pod, would WW2 happen as per otl? The invasions of Austria and Czechoslovakia being cancelled or causing a WW2 precludes [and prevents] a WW2 over Poland in 1939. This is about the unlikely event Italy joins the Allies in late 1939 or early 1940 in a WW2 that starts over Poland as per otl [a pod after August 1939].
 
IOTL, Chamberlain's government did make some half-hearted attempts in the late 1930s to get an alliance with Italy, but that was only to soak Mussolini off of Nazi Germany. The proposals weren't serious, much to Mussolini's frustration. Part of the reason for that was Anthony Eden, who felt Mussolini was unreliable (perhaps out of ethnic stereotyping) while thinking Hitler could be reasoned with.

Mussolini feared Hitler and would only have abandoned him if serious offers had been made by Britain and France. He wanted guarantees for the Italian minority in Tunisia, Italian participation in running the Suez Canal, the establishment of Djibouti as a free port, and the recognition of Victor Emmanuel III as Emperor of Ethiopia. Chamberlain may have been willing to grant some or all of these requests (you'd also require the removal of Eden for this), but the French were in no compromising mood.

More importantly, he wanted an actual military alliance before leaving the Pact of Steel. Mussolini was also somewhat worried about Italy being seen as a traitor, again, but going to war alongside Britain and France would be justified in a situation where they're formally allied. The declarations of war of France and Britain in response to his invasion of Poland could then be explained by Mussolini as a response to German aggression. After the war had begun, he didn't want to be seen as a coward, so he felt compelled to declare war too.

In the end, Mussolini felt he had little choice but to stick to the Pact of Steel, which seemed preferable to facing Hitler alone. Besides that, Mussolini erroneously assumed he could have a moderating influence on Hitler and act as a mediator between the Axis and the Anglo-French allies. He tried to broker a peace deal for a while in 1939, but obviously failed.
 
Last edited:
With a 39 PoD the only solution is getting rid of Benny, he can have an accident and during the following political chaos, Balbo is recalled in Italy by the King to form a new goverment.
Balbo was a Germanophobe and Anglophile, if during the phoney war the Wallies play their card reasonable well they can convince him to join the war at their side.
 
Part ii: Something wrong in the Mediterranean

[The third [or maybe second] pod, a u boat sinks a large Italian ship due to a larger u boat presence in the Mediterranean by mistake [1st or 2nd] pod.]
In February 1940, the U26, the only u boat to enter the Mediterranean during Italian neutrality, passed the Straits of Gibraltar and encountered a passenger liner. Unaware of the identity of the ship at night, the U 26 fired a salvo of torpedoes at the passenger liner Roma.
When the U26 recognised what had just happened, the liner was sinking with massive loss of life. Although the tricolour flag was observed, identification errors resulted in the torpedoes fired as the flag was believed to be French. The passengers, relaxed as they were, were seen to abandon ship in a hurry after two torpedoes struck the ship in quick succession and the liner was underwater in half an hour, with hundreds of casualties from drowning. Although the U 26's commander had the temptation to finish off the liner with torpedoes, the resulting explosions and rumblings of the sinking ship convinced him to leave the spot.
While the sinking was reported to Donitz as a 22,000 ton French passenger liner, the identity of the ship was revealed and there was massive outrage in Italy. Although there were suspicions the liner was torpedoed by an Allied submarine, news reports over the next days proved that a German U boat was the culprit. Upon hearing the news, the Fascist government decided on condemning the German action or declaring war on Germany, but concessions from the Allies had to be secured first lest the Italians get the temptation to join Germany's side over French and British territory.
[Or November 1939]
 
Two additional PODs:

  • Mussolini does not survive one of the several attempts in 1926. With him dead, all of his powers are transferred to Italo Balbo, who was strongly against the Steel Pact. He would probably have striked some kind of deal with the UK up to the point of openly joining their side as he tried to do in OTL as well. After 1933 and the transatlantic flight to the U.S., he was also quite respected overseas (he was even nominated part of the Sioux), and he shared an hatred for communists with them. He also was strongly against racial laws, so no racial laws against the Jews would have been passed with him in charge. Once the war had started, he would have probably focused his attention towards the Air Force as he was deeply interested in aviation.
  • The Allies support an Italian invasion of the Balkans, whose acquisition was one of the main goals of Mussolini. I don't think this one could be likely, tough.
 

thaddeus

Donor
early POD is worse split over Abyssinia (Germany was selling them arms OTL)

followed by Germany supporting Albania, preventing Italian invasion 1939.

THAT would have caused Italy to side with the Allies, even if they don't formally join them.

probably Great Britain and France wouldn't have sanctioned an Italian invasion of Yugoslavia (?) but they certainly WOULD have agreed to invasion of Albania in return for renewed Stresa Front.

IMO Germany would have had to rely on Hungary more, maybe they back the Arrow Cross party https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=314497

Mussolini moves on Albania after German invasion of France, maybe a token force sent to aid Allies. (goes about as well for Italy as their OTL invasion of Greece)

my scenario would be Germans capture the areas of Italy they placed under German control 1943 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italia...iaviewer/File:Italian_social_republic_map.png

and the Dodecanese in Greece (they could always promise the Greeks they would pass to their control after the war.)
 
An Italy that is at least friendly with the Allies is a front that can be reduced from OTL and the troops sent north.
 
Two additional PODs:

  1. Mussolini does not survive one of the several attempts in 1926. With him dead, all of his powers are transferred to Italo Balbo, who was strongly against the Steel Pact. He would probably have striked some kind of deal with the UK up to the point of openly joining their side as he tried to do in OTL as well. After 1933 and the transatlantic flight to the U.S., he was also quite respected overseas (he was even nominated part of the Sioux), and he shared an hatred for communists with them. He also was strongly against racial laws, so no racial laws against the Jews would have been passed with him in charge. Once the war had started, he would have probably focused his attention towards the Air Force as he was deeply interested in aviation.
  2. The Allies support an Italian invasion of the Balkans, whose acquisition was one of the main goals of Mussolini. I don't think this one could be likely, tough.
Is it possible massive outrage over a large ship sinking causes a coup d' etat to overthrow pro German Mussolini or to make him anti German enough to accept Allied concessions [perhaps the Alies try to exploit Italian anger over Germany by giving him the Mediterranean territories he wanted] that he feels there's no reason to declare war on the Allies?
 
Part iii: Allied concessions in Italy's favour

Although the outrage over the liner's sinking caused anger even to the Fascist politicians, concessions from the Allies were needed to prevent the tempation of attacking their territories. The message demanding territorial concessions was sent via telegraph to the British Ambassador in Italy. Although the Allies were willing to accomodate the Italians and wean them from the Germans, the proposal was too audacious for them to accept, and despite the German aggression mentioned in the response and Italy's duty to counter, the Italians felt the German u boat campaign was the only threat on Italy, in contrast to the rich Allied territories in the Mediterranean.
The most intriguing part of the 2nd Treaty of London was that neither the Allies nor the Italians were satisfied with it. It was to be concealed during the war and the parliaments had no knowledge of it.
Several French and British politicians were firmly against it. "We cannot forget what the Italians did in Abyssinia and Albania! And the brutalities and Mussolini's rather insincere attitude. The secret provisions are inexcusable. In exchange for Corsica, Savoy, French North and West Africa, Malta, the Levant and Cyprus plus probably East African colonies and to give the Italians a free hand in the Balkans for Italian participation like in WW1? We have a moral responsibility to refuse. Also, the possibility of the Italians performing poorly in combat and provoking Yugoslavia and even the USSR? "
When Churchill, who would become prime minister on 10 May heard the treaty, he replied,"It's only fair they stay neutral as they proved themselves to be a diplomatic and military liability for us and we had their mediocre performance during the last war. Enough?"
However, Eden responded that although the politicians who opposed Italian participation were correct, the Italian help would be generous. "I presume that if the Italians took part, they could contribute to our victory. With 50 or so divisions in the Italian Army and roughly another 20 to be transported to help their Alpine offensive/defensive operations, the mediocre troops could still contribute to our victory. Having Italy as an ally opposed to an enemy and less troops in the Mediterranean relieves the burden on us and France can transfer the Alpine [6th] Army northwards. Even if to man the Maginot Line, the better divisions could be moved to vulnerable sectors. Also, a couple of Italian battleships and the French Navy fighting Nazi Germany is an advantage. They made these terms because they wanted to join the Allies and this was because they experienced a Lusitania style incident. Can you please sympathise with the Italians? "
Reluctantly, most of the French and British politicians who opposed Italian participation agreed. The concessions given would be reduced to East African colonies, slices of Tunisia and Egypt and Malta for Italy. In the other areas, the rights of Italians would be promoted and the Italian Government would promise not to hold irredentist ambitions until WW2 ended. Although less than satisfactory, Mussolini grudgingly agreed to the treaty after the reduced terms were followed because he was angry over the Roma's sinking. The army and general populace, as a whole, were more supportive of the Allies than Germany, so with the Fascists support, would only face minimal opposition from ethnic Italians.
According to the treaty, signed on 3 May 1940, the Allies would not only uphold Italian rights [the East African colonies, promised bits of Tunisia and Egypt, Malta and Cyprus in Italian hands by 1 May 1940] in the other territories Italy demanded as part of Mare Nostrum, but also help defend Italy from German, Soviet or Balkan power invasion. Other Italian requests not related to the Mediterranean could be entertained and received. Transfer of trainers and troops, plus new technology were not included temporarily.
Finally, once satisfied, Italy declared war on Nazi Germany on 10 May 1940. It was a hurried and 'just in time' decision.
 
Last edited:
Is it possible massive outrage over a large ship sinking causes a coup d' etat to overthrow pro German Mussolini or to make him anti German enough to accept Allied concessions [perhaps the Alies try to exploit Italian anger over Germany by giving him the Mediterranean territories he wanted] that he feels there's no reason to declare war on the Allies?
There were many high-ranking officials in the Fascist Party that were against an alliance with Germany, but Mussolini was basically the one who decided over matters of foreign policy and he was more aligned with Germany rather than the Allies. So I guess that after a passenger ship sinking by the Germans, a coup d'etat to overthrow Mussolini could be possibile in case he kept to support an allegiance with Germany, with Balbo assuming power as Prime Minister and Italy striking an allegiance with Britain (of whom Balbo was fond of) and France (King Victor Emmanuel III would have prefered this solution in OTL as well).

An Italy that is at least friendly with the Allies is a front that can be reduced from OTL and the troops sent north.

In 1939 Italian troops would have been easily defeated by the more modern, better equipped and better trained German forces, unless the Allies deployed additional troops on this front. I guess that Italy would have remained neutral for at least one more year to improve the conditions of its Army.
 
In 1939 Italian troops would have been easily defeated by the more modern, better equipped and better trained German forces, unless the Allies deployed additional troops on this front. I guess that Italy would have remained neutral for at least one more year to improve the conditions of its Army.

Probably...if Germany had any troops to spare for fighting the italians; in reality an Italy aligned with France and UK create an huge problem for the Germans as it throw their all strategic plan on the dustbin as now they need to cover their southern front (not counting the italian air forces start bombarding Austria and Bavaria...as they were a lot less shy of the French in using that assets).
Basically the Third Reich is in serious trouble.
 
Also another factor people may not have considered -

The Pope may speak out in favour of the Allies. During WW2 the Pope asked for guarantees that Vatican City would not be hit by bombing raids against Rome. He did not receive them.

If Italy joins the Allied camp it may be possible, especially if war crimes and genocide are committed, the Pope speaks out against them. It could be particularly difficult for the large Catholic sections of Germany, who even under the Nazis still held onto their beliefs.
 
Probably...if Germany had any troops to spare for fighting the italians; in reality an Italy aligned with France and UK create an huge problem for the Germans as it throw their all strategic plan on the dustbin as now they need to cover their southern front (not counting the italian air forces start bombarding Austria and Bavaria...as they were a lot less shy of the French in using that assets).
Basically the Third Reich is in serious trouble.
The italians had to cross the Alps to invade Germany, so the latter was in a quite good defensive position due to the lack of both equipment and training in mountain warfare from the italians side. And tough I agree that bombing raid in south Germany / Austria might have been represented a serious issue for the Reich, the Italian Royal Air Force wasn't really a great obstacle for the Germans, especially if you think that aircraft-nut Goering was running the Luftwaffe; italians had old planes, slow fighters and few bombers. Overall, Italy might have been a challenging enemy for Germany, but I'm afraid that without any kind of backup from the Allies they would have been wiped out pretty quickly.

Also another factor people may not have considered -

The Pope may speak out in favour of the Allies. During WW2 the Pope asked for guarantees that Vatican City would not be hit by bombing raids against Rome. He did not receive them.

If Italy joins the Allied camp it may be possible, especially if war crimes and genocide are committed, the Pope speaks out against them. It could be particularly difficult for the large Catholic sections of Germany, who even under the Nazis still held onto their beliefs.
Now this is an interesting point. Tough there's been some controversy regarding the position of the Vatican State and Pope Pius XII, as it's quite sure that Vatican officials were involved in aiding the escape of former Nazi criminals and collaborators, Pope statements against Hitler and Nazism may have sparked a flame in Catholic germans to rise against the Reich.
 
The italians had to cross the Alps to invade Germany, so the latter was in a quite good defensive position due to the lack of both equipment and training in mountain warfare from the italians side.

The Alpini divisions and the entire training/stance of the italian army beg to differ and differently by the French border IRC there are not extensive fortification on the Austrian side of the border.
The better line of defense in the Alps is on the italian side as it was the whole reason for aquiring South Tyrol

And tough I agree that bombing raid in south Germany / Austria might have been represented a serious issue for the Reich, the Italian Royal Air Force wasn't really a great obstacle for the Germans, especially if you think that aircraft-nut Goering was running the Luftwaffe; italians had old planes, slow fighters and few bombers. Overall, Italy might have been a challenging enemy for Germany, but I'm afraid that without any kind of backup from the Allies they would have been wiped out pretty quickly.

While i agree that the Luftwaffe had better aircraft and doctrine, she had zero to spare to defend South Germany, not if they want try any offensive in France and the italian air force with the same equipment has fight against the RAF for a couple of years (and in much more adverse condition) so i doubt that the Germans will win so quickly.

Sure Italy alone can't fight Germany, but the OTL Invasion of France was an 'all or nothing' operation that while brilliant was helped by a lot of luck and even a minor change can derail...Italy siding with the Wallies is a change of the size of the Everest, basically Hitler plan are now useless.
 
The Alpini divisions and the entire training/stance of the italian army beg to differ and differently by the French border IRC there are not extensive fortification on the Austrian side of the border.
The better line of defense in the Alps is on the italian side as it was the whole reason for aquiring South Tyrol
The Alpini divisions, I totally agree with you, and I assume that they would have spearheaded the invasion. The rest of the army, not so much, as proved by the catastrophic result of the italian invasion of Greece, which was fought mainly in mountainous scenarios.


While i agree that the Luftwaffe had better aircraft and doctrine, she had zero to spare to defend South Germany, not if they want try any offensive in France and the italian air force with the same equipment has fight against the RAF for a couple of years (and in much more adverse condition) so i doubt that the Germans will win so quickly.
I did not tought about Luftwaffe being employed over France, honestly. I guess that the only way for Germans to get air superiority would have been holding the italian front long enough to conquer Paris.

Sure Italy alone can't fight Germany, but the OTL Invasion of France was an 'all or nothing' operation that while brilliant was helped by a lot of luck and even a minor change can derail...Italy siding with the Wallies is a change of the size of the Everest, basically Hitler plan are now useless.
Might be so, indeed. Still, Yugoslavia and Greece had pro-Germany government, so an italian attack on Germany may have triggered them to join the war on the German side. Even tough Italy might have defended well against both nations, it would have gave Germany enough time to organize a decent defensive or even a counter-attack plan.
 
There is no way a Yugoslav government with any sense of self preservation is joining Germany if they have any other choice.
 
Top