Benito Mussolini: Enemy of the Reich?

[RookieHistorian]

Before the Nazi's began to have any influence on Italy or the facist dictator, Mussolini disagreed with Hitler on several aspects, one of which included racial hatred.

What it Mussolini had stayed with his original views, including the Stresa Front, and relations between Rome and Berlin became strained over this? What potential consequences could an Anti-Hitler Il Duce have on WWII?

I'm not necessarily saying Italy would join the allies, or that Italy and Germany would even fight each other. I am simply wondering what possibilities may be there.

Some examples of his early views are here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benito_...rlin_relations

[Emperor-of-New-Zealand]

I think Italy would have remained neutral in the oncoming war. They would have profitted greatly from selling Libyan oil (I think) to both sides of the war, and acting as a halfway point between the allies in Western Europe and the allies in Eastern Europe.

Benny as Hitler's enemy is good for Italy in the shortterm.

[The Vet]

didnt Musso once describe Hitler as a mad clown?

[Typo]

now is a good time to bring up this joke again

One Germany general says to another, "Italy has entered the war"

The other says, "Then we will need 5 divisions to hold the Alp passes against them."

The first responds, "no sir, they've joined on our side."

The second responds, "Well then we'll need 25 divisions to prop them up"

[Communist Wizard]

Originally Posted by Emperor-of-New-Zealand

I think Italy would have remained neutral in the oncoming war. They would have profitted greatly from selling Libyan oil (I think) to both sides of the war, and acting as a halfway point between the allies in Western Europe and the allies in Eastern Europe.

Benny as Hitler's enemy is good for Italy in the shortterm.

Libyan oil was a non-factor until after Libya got its independence. The war in Europe would have went differently had Libya's oil been known of at the time (and is a relatively common POD used to engineer German victory... somehow).

[Emperor-of-New-Zealand]

Originally Posted by Communist Wizard

Libyan oil was a non-factor until after Libya got its independence. The war in Europe would have went differently had Libya's oil been known of at the time (and is a relatively common POD used to engineer German victory... somehow).

Oh okay. I wasn't sure

[RookieHistorian]

Originally Posted by The Vet

didnt Musso once describe Hitler as a mad clown?

Considering some of this statements and views on Hitler and Nazism that is described in the link, It wouldn't surprise me.

This actually reminded me of an HoI2 AAR where Facist Italy went to war with Germany after the Invasion of France began...can't remember if that one was ever finished.

Besides that, I can see Italy choosing Neutrality. In fact, I believe Mussolini only fully joined the Germans after it became clear the Germans (at the time) were going to win. I wonder what Italy would have done if Fall Gelb had failed/stalemated instead...

[DuQuense]

In 1934 Italy forced Germany to back down over the annexation of Austria.
It was only after Ethiopia, and the LoN sanctions, that Italy was forced to turn to Germany.
Butterfly away the Ethiopian Crisis, and Italy remains in the Allied Camp Politically.

[yourworstnightmare]

Yes, no Abyssinian war would mean Mussolini do not get that sweet taste of Empire, and the Italian relations with France and the UK remain good. Butterflying away the Spanish Civil War might also be necessary since it was then Mussolini and Hitler realized how much they had in common and strted dating.

[wolf_brother]

Italy joined the Spanish Civil War only after Germany did, and only at Hitler's request (and Mussolini wanting not to be out done by Hitler..)

[stodge]

There WAS a window of opportunity for the British and French to keep Mussolini away from Hitler and that was 1934-35. From the abortive Nazi coup in Austria up to and including Stresa, Mussolini was if not in the allied camp then certainly not in the German embrace.

The key is to somehow placate Mussolini's Imperial ambitions without conquest - a deal over Somaliland perhaps or as others have argued, Libya.

The key to continuing this is as much concerted Anglo-French action to stop the remilitarisation of the Rhineland in early 1936. Had London and Paris actively intervened to stop the Germans sending troops across the Rhine, we know that not only would Hitler have ordered a withdrawal (with all the potential political damage that would have caused) but it also seems likely Mussolini would, having seen that the British and French were prepared to stand up to Hitler and having seen how quickly Hitler had folded in the face of such intervention, would have stayed in the allied camp.

If someone ever has the time or imagination, it would be fascinating to write a detailed timeline with the POD of a failed remilitarisation. I don't think it would have brought down Hitler but he would, for example, have had to play Austria very differently.

Had the Italians, backed by the French and British, pledged to uphold Austrian independence, it would have been either retreat or conflict in early 1938.

Here's a bold thought - a chastened Hitler is forced to rein back and concentrate on an anti-Russian policy so maybe in 1939 we see an invitation to move German troops into Poland and possibly a secret Quadripartite Pact between Britain, France, Germany and Italy in which Germany gets Austria and the Sudetenland in exchange for carte blanche to invade the USSR in 1940.

Barbarossa begins on May 1st 1940....

[lukedalton]

Maybe a diplomatic agreement on the Ethiopian crisis as almost done in OTL, maybe here there were not a leak just before the sign or Benny is more quick on sign it (BTW this is a net gain for Italy, no dead, no army resource wasting in the conquest and guerrilla suppression, no waste on money in the conquest and infrastructure building for the colonist), so no sanction (another net gain for the italian economy) and no reapprochment with the German so to obtain badly needed resource.
There still be the Spanish civil war to consider and the sheer amount of support that Italy has given to Franco (not very diplomatic or cover for using an understatment)

[yourworstnightmare]

Musso was never going to agree to proposed diplomatic agreement over Ethiopia. At that point he was dead set to conquest.

The PoD must be before the Abyssinian War. Mussolini must somehow lose interest in annexing it. Perhaps an agreement with the Ethiopians for a railway from Eritrea to Italian Somaliland (would be an enormous concession for the Ethiopians though), which could result in more Italians knowing how poor and useless Ethiopia was, and in the end convince Mussolini that conquest wasn't worth it.

[Shimbo]

Originally Posted by Typo

now is a good time to bring up this joke again

One Germany general says to another, "Italy has entered the war"

The other says, "Then we will need 5 divisions to hold the Alp passes against them."

The first responds, "no sir, they've joined on our side."

The second responds, "Well then we'll need 25 divisions to prop them up"

There's an apocrophal story that when the Italians joined the war, Germans received a diplomatic communication from the British that said, "We had them last time, so it's only fair you have them this time."

[aktarian]

Originally Posted by Shimbo

There's an apocrophal story that when the Italians joined the war, Germans received a diplomatic communication from the British that said, "We had them last time, so it's only fair you have them this time."

I've heard that after the war Rundstedt said that line to British interogators. "We had them this time, now it's your turn again."

[RookieHistorian]

Originally Posted by stodge

The key to continuing this is as much concerted Anglo-French action to stop the remilitarisation of the Rhineland in early 1936. Had London and Paris actively intervened to stop the Germans sending troops across the Rhine, we know that not only would Hitler have ordered a withdrawal (with all the potential political damage that would have caused) but it also seems likely Mussolini would, having seen that the British and French were prepared to stand up to Hitler and having seen how quickly Hitler had folded in the face of such intervention, would have stayed in the allied camp.

I don't think Hitler would have backed down, or at least not completely. If the British or French had actually told Germany "Stand Down or else" I think he might've started talks over the possibility of gradual remilitarization of the Rhineland, or simply cut down the number of military force he would be sending in.

[Wendell]

You know, a neutral Italy probably helps Germany for than it hurts, because Italian neutrality butterflies away the campaigns in the Balkans, and might even help to gain Germany more allies in that area.

[lounge60]

What about racism?
If Hitler hated and despised Italians explicity in Mein Kampf...

P.S.
About Ethiopia i don't never understood why UK was so aganist.
A new Empire in 1936 can help to keep alive the colonialist idea.
Antagonize with Italy for a new colony,when you have a huge colonial Empire is much silly,for me.

[Wendell]

Allowing the conquest of Ethiopia would have/did totally discredit the League of Nations.

[gridlocked]

I blame British and French diplomacy during the 20s and 30s. It was antagonistic without being effective. The failure of League of Nations type diplomacy.

UK needed to strike a deal with Mussolini or teach him a lesson. They did neither.