WI Mussolini attacked Greece in 1923

[Don_Giorgio]

In 1923 following the assassination of General Enrico Tellini in the Greek-Albanian borders Mussolini delivered an ultimatum to the Greek Government asking for reparations and that the General's assassins to be executed...
Greek Government replied that the Tellini assassination was work of Albanians and that Greeks werent resposnsible for that... Besides they were unable to identify them since they were Albanians...
Mussolini enraged he bombed and occupied the island of Corfu...
Greece took the matter to the League of Nations and it was settled in the Ambassadors Conderence which decided that Italians should left the island and Greece apologises for the murder and pays for reparations...
WI this conflict escalated to full war between Italy and Greece in 1923?
What happens then?

[SteveW]

A good POD you've got there. I reckon that the League of Nations might actually show its teeth- after all, Britain was very concerned with Greece for strategic reasons. An oil embargo, maybe?

[Don_Giorgio]

League of Nations was weak from birth... Always searching for an easy solution... like this case... thats why it was unable to prevent WWII...

[Alexius]

Militarily, Italy could bomb Greece flat (insofar as that is possible with 1923 biplanes) with impunity- the Greek air force was small and equipped with WW1-vintage aircraft, mainly DH4s, DH9s, Spad VIIs, and Sopwith Camels and Pups.
However, a land invasion would be more difficult. Italy did not have control of Albania- where they invaded from in 1940- so the only way to get to the Greek mainland would be an amphibious assault. Italy could capture a lot of islands due to Italian naval superiority, but taking the mainland would be extremely difficult.

SteveW- I don't know how the League would deal with this, since Italy's veto may well have prevented action. This may well have resulted in an early breakup of the League, and the British Mediterranean Fleet being used to stop the invasion.

[clifton]

island by island battle and a major invasion of kreta. and if Greece not surrender it would likely be a invasion of the mainland, but would likely fails and Italy may kept the islands and kreta.

[Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy]

Expect the Serbs to show themselves a lot less cooperative on the Fiume/Rijeka issue now that Mussolini has beared his teeth. The Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes might even intervene on the Greek side.

What's the situation for the Regia Maritima in the Dodecanese? Is Greece capable of seizing the archipelago in retaliation?

And are there still Italian forces in Asia Minor by this point?

[DuQuense]

Mussolini had only been in Power a Year, any upset and the blackshirts are out.

[Alexius]

Originally Posted by Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy

What's the situation for the Regia Maritima in the Dodecanese? Is Greece capable of seizing the archipelago in retaliation?

Without British help, the only place the Royal Hellenic Navy is going is to the bottom of the Mediterranean. It consists of: 2 pre-dreadnoughts, one 1910 Italian armoured cruiser, one ex-Chinese light cruiser, 15 destroyers, 2 very small subs and 3 truly ancient coastal-defense battleships on their way to the scrapyard. The Italians have 6 dreadnoughts- although admittedly one is the Austro-Hungarian war prize SMS Teggetthoff, which may not have ever served with the RM.

Truly one-sided...

[Croesus]

OTL the British-led League response was constrained by concerns that Mussoliini would commit a 'mad-dog' act. This TL has Mussolini plunging straight ahead and so negating that constraint. So its not quite a straightforward case of saying the League is toothless and unwilling.

In the case of aggression any Italian veto would have no effect; but a French one would and during this period there is no significant Italo-French disjuncture. OTL Britain failed to put its weight behind the League and enforce its will short of declaring war; ITTL a declaration of war might be more likely to be forthcoming, but that would be taken outside the auspices of the League and things might thenceforward get politically tricky for London, esp. if Paris takes the line of a negotiated Italo-Greek peace which would show the British declaration of war in a very poor light indeed.

Britain would be able to push the League into action in case of invasion, but France would be acting such that Italy would be given some form of easy out, such as a negotiated peace. Given that Italy is not in shape for a war of conquest, nor would such a war be politically desireable for Mussolini, and that Greece is in no shape to sieze back territory lost on the periphery, then I think what we see is a League that, outwardly at least, passes its first major test.

London presses for a hard-line and sanctions are voted with other interventions debated. Paris puts its weight behind a League solution and promotes the negotiated peace. Rome and Athens agree and a peace conference is held while the fighting naturally becomes sluggish and desultory. Following a somewhat lengthy period replete with drama and crisis, peace is agreed. Italy retains Corfu and perhaps some other minor holdings and is required to pay some form of indemnity.

The effect on Belgrade is possibly to heighten tensions with Rome and advance the internal process that leads to the royal dictatorship and associated policy of war with Italy. Greece would of course be somewhat unhappy about things as it got the raw end of the deal and there is an Albanian crisis about to emerge that would see Italo-Yugoslav relations tested. In light of the Leagues success(failure) at Corfu there could well be a further outbreak of hostilities and, if there is any sense of Greco-Yugoslav commonality, then Bulgaria would likely become interested in supporting the Italian position.

[Atreus]

Originally Posted by Alexius

Truly one-sided...

Well, this is Mussolini we are talking about...

[Michele]

Originally Posted by Atreus

Well, this is Mussolini we are talking about...

Yes, it's right to point that out: he was the easy winner of easy one-sided battles, the conqueror of Abyssinia and Albania. So he would be up to this.

[Michele]

Originally Posted by Croesus

OTL the British-led League response was constrained by concerns that Mussoliini would commit a 'mad-dog' act. This TL has Mussolini plunging straight ahead and so negating that constraint. So its not quite a straightforward case of saying the League is toothless and unwilling.


(...)

Following a somewhat lengthy period replete with drama and crisis, peace is agreed. Italy retains Corfu and perhaps some other minor holdings and is required to pay some form of indemnity.

The effect on Belgrade is possibly to heighten tensions with Rome and advance the internal process that leads to the royal dictatorship and associated policy of war with Italy. Greece would of course be somewhat unhappy about things as it got the raw end of the deal and there is an Albanian crisis about to emerge that would see Italo-Yugoslav relations tested. In light of the Leagues success(failure) at Corfu there could well be a further outbreak of hostilities and, if there is any sense of Greco-Yugoslav commonality, then Bulgaria would likely become interested in supporting the Italian position.

Interesting scenario. Having won a war so early will probably whet Benito's appetite. Having gained Corfu will possibly orientate Fascist Italy's ambitions even more in that direction, and the Albanian move may take place much earlier than OTL.
There's a toll to be paid, though. Mussolini is seen as the loose cannon of Europe, not as the strongman who dealt with the Communist threat and train lateness in Italy. And that's way before those German elections of 1933...

[yourworstnightmare]

I'm pretty sure Mussolini would somehow screw up against the greeks and lost the Dodecanese and probably all his influence and basis of power, would probably been thrown out of Rome by angry activists within weeks after this event.
However this would probably mean an early dissolution of the League of Nations, and a deathblow to fascism as an ideology. i can see communists and anarcho- syndicalists doing very well in italian politics after this event.

[Doug M.]

Good POD!

A question: when in 1923? Was this before or after Greece's Asia Minor disaster?


Doug M.

[yourworstnightmare]

If it was before the turks and the italians might unwillingly help eachother... A hard palce for the greeks, put in some revengist bulgarians, and the greeks getting support from Romania and Ýugoslavia, then Hungary could support Italy and Bulgaria. Would be a new balkan war. And Italy would still probably screw up, the turks would still throw out all other peoples and powers from anatolia and Bulgaria and Hungary would be wiped out of existence!!

[Michele]

Originally Posted by yourworstnightmare

I'm pretty sure Mussolini would somehow screw up against the greeks and lost the Dodecanese and probably all his influence and basis of power, would probably been thrown out of Rome by angry activists within weeks after this event.
However this would probably mean an early dissolution of the League of Nations, and a deathblow to fascism as an ideology. i can see communists and anarcho- syndicalists doing very well in italian politics after this event.

You are pretty sure on the basis of what? Mussolini's performance in WWII, his performance in the Greek part of it? If so, you should also consider his performance in Spain, Abyssinia and Albania, which are better comparisons. You should also duly take note that in 1923, the Greek army still was in disarray after having been kicked out of Smyrna by the Turks. You should consider that, since Italy had no beachhead in Albania, this would be a naval war first and foremost; have you looked up what assets the two navies could rely upon? You should also consider that, even before the LoN was summoned to settle the controversy, the Italians had already bombarded, landed and occupied Corfu. With what do you think the Greeks are going to land and occupy the Dodecanese exactly?

[Michele]

Originally Posted by Doug M.

Good POD!

A question: when in 1923? Was this before or after Greece's Asia Minor disaster?


Doug M.

August 1923. After. But not so long after that the Greek militayr had finished licking its wounds.

[chris N]

While Italy would have had a naval advantage it would be questionable as to how well the Italian army would do. It must be pointed out that Italy suffered serious manpower loses in World war I and not ready to fight a war in 1923. Its one advantage would be that it still had a huge stockpile of WWI artillery but economicly Italy was in trouble.

[Michele]

Originally Posted by chris N

While Italy would have had a naval advantage it would be questionable as to how well the Italian army would do. It must be pointed out that Italy suffered serious manpower loses in World war I and not ready to fight a war in 1923. Its one advantage would be that it still had a huge stockpile of WWI artillery but economicly Italy was in trouble.

Sure, the Italian army had fought until 1918. Now, what had been the Greek military doing in, say, 1922, i.e. the year before? Enjoying peace to zealously train and build up their strength?