AHC: Keep Italy a Kingdom
- Thread starter SavoyTruffle
- Start date
2-3 june 1946... the referendum are declared null and void.
Next referendum conduct with supervision of Allies and specify the vice-admiral Ellery Stone, reach a quorum of 50%+1... victory for the Monarchy. (in fact there are some clue of a manipulated referendum of '46 from three main parties as: Italian Comunist Party, Christian Democracy and Italian Socialist Party/historical the republican win have about 2milions of votes more than monarchy but with the void and white votes the detachment are of only 250.000 votes => re-examinate the votes between the 11 and 14 of june).
Next fase, Umberto II King of Italy and De Gasperi next leader of government.
Paul V McNutt
Banned
HAve the king oppose Mussolini. El Duce imprisons his majesty and takes the title of regent. After World War II the king is a hero.
The 28th October 1922, Vittorio Emanuele II signed the proclaim which enacted the state of siege in Italy; the army sent away the fascist columns in march to Rome, Mussolini fled in Switzerland and democracy and monarchy will be preserved.
Otherwise, a coup of state from Great Council before 10 June 1940 to remove Mussolini; so Italy remained neutral in WWII.
Otherwise, a coup of state from Great Council before 10 June 1940 to remove Mussolini; so Italy remained neutral in WWII.
Has has been stated in above posts, after the War the monarchy was associated with the Fascist dictatorship of Mussolini, so I think the easiest way to retain the Italian monarchy is to prevent Mussolini's rise to power in the first place.
The Referendum was a close thing, probably a better management of the '43 surrender who basically caused the collapse of the Armed Forces and of the State with the Partisan (expecially the communist) take a lot of deserters so growing very large in brief times, can clear enough the image of the Royal Family to permit a victory.
The problem was that Vittorio Emanule III was the nominal (and effective) commander in chief of the armed forces who (expecially the army and less the aviation) were very loyal to the king, basically until the war with Ethiopia, he always had the option to depose the DUce if he want.
The problem was that Vittorio Emanule III was the nominal (and effective) commander in chief of the armed forces who (expecially the army and less the aviation) were very loyal to the king, basically until the war with Ethiopia, he always had the option to depose the DUce if he want.
But i cant view other possibilities for maintein the monarchy after 1900.
Only declared Italy neutral during the war or changing the front before the war start the monarchy have a possibility for survive. Using the navy for help into defence of UK in North Atlantic and hoping a support action of Allies in the north of the country aganist the german army.
It's possible using the north of Italy for lunch an attack to the Germany and conquer Berlin before the Soviet Red Army arrive.
Sorry for the map, it's the first can i found.
Italy not entering the war in the first place is obviously the best PoD, but as lukedalton says the surrender was really badly mishandled - very little notice was given to the Armed Forces, many of whom learned of it when the Germans turned up to intern them. Also the manner in which the Royal Family and Government fled Rome was seen as being cowardly and underhand - if they had taken a Queen-Mum approach - "the children will not leave without me, I will not leave without the King, and the King will not leave" - then they might be viewed rather more positively. The Germans are hardly going to shoot the King, are they?
Also, Prince Umberto was much more popular than his father. If Victor Emmanuel II abdicated at an earlier date Umberto might have more of a chance to swing public opinion in his favour.
Also, Prince Umberto was much more popular than his father. If Victor Emmanuel II abdicated at an earlier date Umberto might have more of a chance to swing public opinion in his favour.
Italy never entering the war would have all kinds of consequences besides possibly preserving the Italian monarchy. No Italian assault on Greece, therefore no reason for Germany to go through Yugoslavia to pull their chestnuts out of the fire. No involvement of Yugoslavia, therefore no temptation to Bulgaria to pitch in to at last get their hands on Macedonia. Italian Libya separating German forces in French North Africa from British in Egypt, so no desert campaign. No second Great Siege of Malta, in fact the Royal Navy would have been under far less pressure in the Mediterranean generally.
Heck, it could even lead to no Pearl Harbour! The British triumph at Taranto was an inspiration to Japanese naval planners, also fewer assets tied up holding the Mediterranean might have meant more in the Far East to deter Japan. It's a stretch, but not I think a totally ludicrous one. And no Pearl Harbour of course means no or later American entry to the war, prolonging the conflict if not changing its outcome.
But if Mussolini had had the wisdom à la Franco to stay out then yes it probably would have preserved the Italian monarchy, there was no particular reason for it to fall otherwise. Less drastic means of keeping the House of Savoy enthroned would as mentioned be an honest referendum and/or Victor Emmanuel III abdicating earlier in favour of the popular Umberto, as he could and should have done. With a figurehead untarnished by the Fascist regime having had time to establish himself, the referendum might have been won decisively.
Heck, it could even lead to no Pearl Harbour! The British triumph at Taranto was an inspiration to Japanese naval planners, also fewer assets tied up holding the Mediterranean might have meant more in the Far East to deter Japan. It's a stretch, but not I think a totally ludicrous one. And no Pearl Harbour of course means no or later American entry to the war, prolonging the conflict if not changing its outcome.
But if Mussolini had had the wisdom à la Franco to stay out then yes it probably would have preserved the Italian monarchy, there was no particular reason for it to fall otherwise. Less drastic means of keeping the House of Savoy enthroned would as mentioned be an honest referendum and/or Victor Emmanuel III abdicating earlier in favour of the popular Umberto, as he could and should have done. With a figurehead untarnished by the Fascist regime having had time to establish himself, the referendum might have been won decisively.
The most realistic POD for a surviving italian monarchy is the june 1946 referendum: as Khan Mengsk said, there are many clues that someone tampered with the tesults. So, you have two options:
> the referendum results are not accepted due to suspects (or even proofs) of irregularities; the referendum is repeated and, thanks to the widespread rumours (or even proofs) of tampering, the republican side loses.
> the Allies, worried by the increasing popular support towards left parties in the peninsula, create fake proofs of irregularities and frame someone for the crime; the referendum is repeated and, with discrete "help" from the Allies, the monarchic side wins.
Those are, IMHO, the most realistic POD. Earlier divergences not really probable: an Italian neutrality during WWII was never really contemplated by the fascist government and a more direct approach of the King to the "fascist problem" in its early incarnation is unlikely.
> the referendum results are not accepted due to suspects (or even proofs) of irregularities; the referendum is repeated and, thanks to the widespread rumours (or even proofs) of tampering, the republican side loses.
> the Allies, worried by the increasing popular support towards left parties in the peninsula, create fake proofs of irregularities and frame someone for the crime; the referendum is repeated and, with discrete "help" from the Allies, the monarchic side wins.
Those are, IMHO, the most realistic POD. Earlier divergences not really probable: an Italian neutrality during WWII was never really contemplated by the fascist government and a more direct approach of the King to the "fascist problem" in its early incarnation is unlikely.
Yes, but Mussolini wan't go at war without a form of military superiority (technological, numbers ecc) he must waiting the right occasion for attack and he and mr.Churchill can have the possibility for sign a treaty like in the first world war scenario.
Mussolini hate the nazi, in first location Hitler, and he wan't an ally with them. He is forced to join the axes.
But in all cases, the Referendum i think is the most realistic POD for maintein the monarchy. The "irregularities" stay into not consider the void and white votes, many citizens have voted for the republic thinking that logo is the monarchy logo (a woman with a crown as like the queen) one of many "irregularities" makes by "republicans".
The queen... a present for the nazi from Vaticano, she have request political aid at the Vatican but this have not accept. She is death by the hands of nazi.
II world war have a charge of too many sad memories for us.
You never had germans troops in French North Africa... The first germans troops from Italy came in Tunesia in November / December 1942...
If Italy stayed neutral, it butterflied any military campaign in the Mediterranean sea. But it can also butterfly a Vichy state.
There are no realistic reasons to remain neutral during WWII. In order to accomplish an Italian neutrality you have to butterfly away a lot of previous event. It's way more simple (and elegant, at least IMO) placing the POD after the war: if you place the divergence too early a timeline focused on the Italian Monarchy will be hard-pressed to mantain its focus on the italian political scene...a lot of more interesting and complex things would need to be fleshed out, and it would all end in another WWII alternate timeline.
The only thing that can bring italy in the neutral camp is someone who can convince Benny that the Armed Forces are in abysmal condition and that are not ready for a conflict (in OTL Badoglio and other try to tell that to the Duce but the Fall of France blinded him), so one must be very convincing or at least convince the King even that we must be neutral out of necessity, so even if Vittorio Emanuele will be overruled and Italy enter the war and all happened as OTL after war the image of the King is more positive.
If the King or maybe Balbo and Ciano stall Benny until the Battle of Britain, he convince himself that this will not be a short victorious war but a prolonged struggle so he will take a neutral stance, probably tring to extort concession from both party or attacking Yugoslavia later.