Covering the Senussis and Italian East Africa - specifically British tomfoolery thereabouts - would fit well within the more Italian-oriented perspective you’ve pursued in the early going of this version of the TL, I think, so I’d definitely encourage a deep dive there
Italian East Africa will be the subject of chapter eleven; Libya chapter twelve.
Define "British tomfoolery"- I could do with some creative ideas to work in.
^ This, Britain (and her Dominions), France and Japan have more forces in the colonies that they could easily take any colonies the CP have, so basically playing out as it did IOTL regardless of Italy's position.
Not to mention that Italy joining the CP pretty much made the Eastern Mediterranean a de facto CP Lake. (with only Egypt and British Cyprus being the only holdings the Entente have in that general region, not counting Serbia or Montenegro) all things considered, and the stronger position means that unless Venizelos is indeed crazy enough to force Greece into the Entente (already a tall task and one where the Entente, Britain specifically, is neither willing nor able to support the venture and the King is vehemently opposed), that Greece will retain neutral, which is the smart play here.
I doubt the British would risk sending ships so close to the Greek mainland to threaten Athens ITTL, especially if much like in OTL the Mittelmeerdivision of the Imperial German Navy managed to get to Constantinople. The threat of the Regia Marina and/or the KuK is bad enough, even if the British have the qualitative advantage, factor in Souchon and the British won't risk an engagement without overwhelming numbers. And they can't get that - before 1917 - without moving ships from the Grand Fleet. At least in terms of capital ships, that is. Britain has plenty of light ships, but I'm not sure if they'd risk an engagement with Goeben and the Italian/Habsburg dreadnoughts with only armored and light cruisers.
Chapter 10 proved you both right regarding Greece. I may have mentioned it before, but with the war winding down (if not over) in early 1917, the Entente will have no reason to back Venizelos' return to the Mainland. Either it will be butterflied altogether or it will fail. The consequences to Greek politics of King Constantine reigning another 20 years uninterrupted will be seismic.
@Noblesse Oblige, without spoiling anything too badly, you're pretty much right about East Africa.
@Jaenera Targaryen, that's a naval battle I'm itching to write. A Mediterranean Jutland is, I'll concede, not terribly plausible, but it would be immense fun to write. If I can do it, I will!
OTL Cadorna was opposed to the military expedition to Albania, since the Supreme Commander considered an idiotic idea which he considered dangerous to advance his troops inside a poor, backward country, without roads and infested with bandits; but the expedition was practically imposed on him both by the allies and by the politicians. The facts proved Cadorna right, but Bertotti, who had remained neutral in the clash between pro Cadornians and anti Cadornians in the Italian General Staff, took it very badly, going so far as to accuse Cadorna of sabotage. After the war, both Bertotti and Cadorna argued for a long time, publishing a series of essays and memorials on the First World War. ITL will relationships be less strained?
ITL, given that Italy and Turkey are allies, will the situation in Libya be calmer? Will the Senussi, in their offensive in Egypt, have Italian support, collecting better results? Will the political agreement of Bīr ‛Ákramah between Italy and Senussia, in this different context, survive, or will it be ditched by the extremists of both parties?
OTL In July 1916 - after a thousand discussions and second thoughts - the Italian Government and the Italian Supreme Command finally agreed to send the 35th Division to Greece, under the orders of General Petitti di Roreto. In reality it was not so much an ordinary division but a very robust special unit made up of 44,000 troops. More specifically, the 35th was formed by two infantry brigades (Sicily and Cagliari) reinforced later by Ivrea), by the 2nd Mountain Artillery Regiment (divided into 8 batteries), by the 1st Cavalry Squadron Lucca and by several departments made up of machine gunners and mortars. It was completed by a half dozen battalions of the sappers and bridges, health, transmission and subsistence. The team was equipped with individual and standard armament: Carcano model '91 muskets with bayonet, hand grenades, pistols (for officers), water-cooled Fiat machine guns, trench bomb launchers, 65 mm mountain guns. and some 75mm campaign pieces. In support of the Expeditionary Corps, the transfer to Thessaloniki of 438 officers, pilots and aeronautics specialists with various squadrons of armed reconnaissance biplanes Farman and S.A.M.L. S1 and S2. On 8 August 1916, the first contingents began to leave from Taranto on board steamers, after all the training for landings in France had not been wasted
The expeditionary force removed the chestnuts from the fire at the Armée d'Orient, in Macedonia ... ITL where will these troops be engaged? And what will the Armée d'Orient do?
P.S other useful material for ucronia
In reality, it is not so .... Cadorna, since the government hesitated to start the expedition to Macedonia, threatened to resign (in addition to his memorials, we also have those of Vittorio Orlando and Sonnino). In addition, he supported an expedition in support of the British in Sinai, and to resume military relations with Sheikh Asir Sa'id Idris, who led the Yemeni rebellion against the Turks, who had been on the side of the Italians in 1911 and of organize a landing either in Alexandretta or in the Dalaman area, in an attempt to hasten the Turkish collapse. He was opposed to an intervention in Libya, simply because he had many doubts as to whether the training and equipment of the Royal Army was suitable for that operational scenario. Who forced the Isonzo was Rome, for economic and political reasons, and the Anglo-French Command, which believed, in a global key, also to support Russia, to bleed Austria-Hungary on the Isonzo ... On the Senussi, it was the advance French from the basin of Lake Ciād and the Wadāi to endanger the extreme south of Senussis and paralyze the slave trade and the smuggling of arms, which constituted the main economic income of the Brotherhood; furthermore, the Anglo-Egyptians strove to widen their western border more and more. Precisely these two events, in the summer of 1909, led Aḥmad ash-Sharīf to recognize the high Ottoman sovereignty and to let a caimacamate be nominally established in Cufra, which should have been dependent on the Benghazi mutaṣarrifat. Therefore, a change of alliance in progress, unless unlikely events, seems to me impracticable
My usual little notes of Italian military history: Luigi Rizzo has never commanded a submarine. OTL In the First World War, from June 1915 to the end of 1916 it was assigned to the maritime defense of Grado near Venice, where, under the orders of the lieutenant captain Filippo Camperio first and the frigate captain Alfredo Dentice di Frasso then, he distinguished himself particularly , also obtaining a silver medal for military valor. He was later transferred to the newly formed MAS squadron, taking part in various war missions. The MASs were not submarines, but armed speedboats.
Among other things, Italy at the time did not have all these submarines: during the First World War it launched 21 of the following classes
1 Argonauta (255/305 t)
1 Atropos (231/315 t)
1 Dolphin (102/113 t)
1 Seal (185/280 t)
5 Glauco class (160/243 t)
2 Nautilus class (255/303 t)
8 Medusa class (250/305 t)
2 class Pullino (355/405 t)
Most of these submarines were used for coastal defense: only 5 for offensive missions in the Adriatic and Mediterranean. The most likely candidate for the action you describe should be the Nereidr, of the Nautilus Class, commanded by Carlo Del Greco, who OTL for his tragic end, was the first gold medal for military valor of the Regia Marina in the First World War
Thank you as always for your constructive criticism and pointing me towards good resources. Nothing is as helpful when it comes to making the TL better! To address some of your points:
-Cadorna isn't thrilled about the Albanian expedition ITTL, either. I state in a footnote for chapter nine that the Italian expeditionary force is half the size of OTL's. A big part of this is due to Cadorna's hesitancy: other objectives take priority in his mind. The whole thing is a case of advancing political goals under a military guise, as opposed to hitting where it will objectively damage the enemy the most. I should also add that Essat Pasha's control of Albania, even at this stage, is very precarious. The country is a long way from the stable protectorate Rome dreams of.
-I need to do more research on the Senussi before writing chapter twelve, but I was under the impression they were as hostile to Italy as to Britain. Islam was obviously a motivating factor, which pushed them towards the Ottoman Empire and by extension the Central Powers. So my question to you is:
do you think Italy would have been willing to make concessions to the Senussi, and risk strengthening a potential enemy, in order to stick it to the British here and now? I genuinely don't know and any advice/opinion would be most helpful.
-There's also the chance that the Senussi might proclaim
jihad against Britain with Ottoman and German backing, and there's nothing Italy can do one way or another.
-Thanks for the ORBAT for the 35th Division. If I can extrapolate that to other Italian divisions, it'll come in handy. The 35th won't be going to Greece ITTL; it might end up in Albania or North Africa though.
-There is no
Armeé d'Orient ITTL. France is too busy with its second front, and with the hostile Italian Navy in the way, popular appetite for going to Salonika is a lot less.
-I knew Luigi Rizzo was posted near Grazzo in OTL, but with the Habsburg navy a co-belligerent (ally is probably too strong a word), the need for coast-defence would be a lot less, so he'd likely be elsewhere. I always assumed he used a submarine to sink the
Viribus Unitis; the idea of doing it with a speedboat seems strange. But thanks for the info- it'll come in handy when I write a dedicated naval chapter- and I'll make the necessary retcons.
Well Cadorna was opposed at any use of the italian soldiers that was not: put them directly against A-H in the Isonzo front...even if with a little hindsight, more than tons of offensive there, the soldiers will have been much more usefull in the Macedonian and Sinai front.
But speaking of the expeditionary force in Albania, well the zone is too strategically important and with too many party interested to not send anyone because the Generallisimo don't care of that front as OTL you will need foot on the ground to realistically press your claim, so troops will need to be sent regardless of the terrain.
The Senussi relationship with Turkey was...well they used each other and the first wanted to be independent even from the Porte, so French and/or British can be tempted to supply them with some weapon or/and give them some safe zone where enstablish bases
Agreed regarding Albania.
I can't really see the Entente backing the Senussi- the relationship was very hostile prewar. That said, I could see Britain
creating out of thin air backing a rival Senussi government which claims "freedom from the despotic Italians and faraway Turks". Something to consider at any rate.
IF the Serbian army enters Greece to save their asses the neutrality ends.
there's no way Germany or Bulgaria will accept that. remember that Germany didn't even consider to not invade Belgium.
Greece is a lot more weaker.
if i remember well during the Balkan war Greece had the second smallest army after Montenegro. something like 150K troops. badly equipped.
Bulgaria and Albania would be more than enough to invade.
But that also relies on "if." To be fair, they could, Greece and Serbia have always been close, at least since both nations regained independence in the 19th century. So there is a chance that it could happen. However it also depends on what either Venizelos or Konstantinos I does. Does Greece turn on their friendship and turn the Serbs away (which is the path likely to be favored by Constantine), or do they risk sacrificing their neutrality and allow them in (which is the path likely to be favored by Venizelos). Obviously Bulgaria would likely favor the Venezelist route, as war with Greece means one step closer to fulfilling Greater Bulgaria.
As we saw in the update war was a real risk yet Constantine handled it well enough.
Venizelism will have much less room to grow here.
My ability to feel sympathy for the Serbian people as they wholeheartedly embrace this national suicide pact is zero, in this context.
But congrats to Constantine for managing to stay out of the war.
Why do you not feel sympathy for the Serbs? Not saying you're right or wrong-- just curious.
And...Italy just unintentionally decapitated the Serbian government, all in a single stroke. That's one way to earn the unending hatred of the Serbian people (though it's not like they haven't earned it anyway).
Technically, only King Peter was aboard the boat. Parliament was scattered to the Four Winds, with some in captivity, others in exile in Greece or elsewhere, and others dead.
But as an accomplice in Serbia's demise, Italy has earned its ire.
So does that qualify as a "flew too close to the sun" moment?
Also Peter I is dead, Alexander is to become king...assuming there will be a monarchy left for him. I know Serbia will survive, Austria isn't fixing to enforce a claim from the 18th century by right of conquest. But stupider things have happened in history.
We'll have to see.
Technically speaking, Serbia is a rogue state if you go by modern international law, between their sponsorship of terrorist organizations in other countries, and conspiring to commit a war of aggression to build a Greater Serbia. The assassination of Franz Ferdinand is a valid cassus belli, and Austria-Hungary justified to previously demand for Serbia to allow them to investigate the issue and to arrest anyone they found connected to it.
Best choice he ever made. Either way, no Greeks have to die, and he doesn't risk losing any territory.
Regarding Serbia: many saw them as a "rogue state" prior to 1914 in OTL, even if they didn't use that phrase. With the Central Powers writing the histories here, they won't get much sympathy.
not sure but i think the obrenovic were already extinct.
the only one i can think of is
this guy but he's technically illegitimate.
He's one potential candidate... I have two or three possibilities in my notes.
Well, to the rogue nations stuff we can the Serbianization process they were enforcing in Kosovo and Macedonia.In the latter they killed whoever spoke Bulgarian,closed all churches, deported all the main nationalists… [1]
As a Bulgarian i'm kinda happy for a TL were Bulgaria does not lose 3 wars in a row just because of national unity denied.
The fall of Serbia is also the kings fault because like in OTL when Russia and the Entente offered him Bosnia and more if he gave Macedonia to Bulgaria for their help he refused.
[1] not gonna deny that Bulgaria, Greece and OE did the same thing in the Balkans wars.
A very good response; very honest about Peter's responsibility. The man went to his grave (ITTL anyway) genuinely sorry for what he'd caused so that's something.
Indeed! Good discussion is one of the best parts of any timeline.
Both of these are hilarious. Memes are always welcome hereabouts.
I'm sure they don't care about the illegitimacy if they can put him in charge. They may also be able to dredge up some cadet line or matrilineal connection.
I don't think Austria will care what the people of Serbia think. He's a puppet, not an independent ruler.
Far more questionable claims have 'flown' before. As long as he has guns at his back he'll be alright.
the problem is Slavic nations don't care bout legitimacy but compentece.
if the guys is an idiot at governing or an obvious puppet he'll be killed and replaced by someone with a brain.
Serbia did so already 2/3 times by swapping between Karadorcevic and Obrenovic.
Ferdinand got lucky to be allowed to abdicate in favor of Boris only because the latter was popular in the army for participating actively as general. otherwise there would have been a new dynasty or even a republic( Stambolisky was a good guy but a bit too close to communism)
Caring not about legitimacy but competence-- the Slavs aren't alone there!
I often wonder what Stambolisky's Bulgaria would have looked like.
Counter argument: International Law is what the people interpreting it say that it is
Which means that it's essentially just London's Cudgel and none of these facts are relevent
You mean West Bulgaria, which is most likely what will be left of Serbia after the peace conference
London's Cudgel on the High Seas; Berlin's Cudgel on the Continent.
There will be a lot less of Serbia afterwards, for sure.
Oh boy the british press is going to have a field day with this, I wonder which flavour of racism they'll use.
It won't be pleasant.
What cadet line was there for the Karadordevic's? Outside of the line of the future Prince Paul, I can't think of any, and I'm certain that Austria-Hungary would prefer no Karadordevic's take the throne.
Though in fairness, I did some digging, and it seems that the occupation forces IOTL were kinda debating on whether or not they would want to annex Serbia (and Montenegro) outright. This was supported in favor by Franz Conrad von Hötzendorf and Johan von Salis-Seewis, and was generally opposed by pro-Hungarian figures such as Hungarian PM István Tisza and Lajos Thallóczy (before his death in a train crash in December 1916 IOTL). While annexation may not necessarily guaranteed, it is feasible enough that one could make that argument.
I will link the relevant Wikipedia page on the Austro-Hungarian occupation of Serbia
here, while her Bulgarian counterpart will be
linked here.
Thanks for the links-- those'll come in handy.
I personally think crowning a puppet would make more sense-- why add more unruly Slavs to a country already facing ethnic division? As you pointed out, the Hungarians would object strongly (and when the Habsburgs ignored Hungary in 1.0, things went
poorly).
Meh
As a Bulgarian, i'll tell you, excluding the communist there was never a yugoslavian dream.
Bulgarian simply wanted a nation strong, independent and containing the territories regarded as hisotrically Bulgarian.( Nish, Pirot, Macedonia, Thrace, Moesia, Dobruja)
in a peace conference Bulgaria will mainly focus to get Pirot and Macedonia then if allowed will grab Nish and most then proceed to Expel all Serbians.
Austria knows that they are at they limit. While they might consider some expansion in Russian Poland/Ukraine, with Serbia they will revise the border taking the best defending position and then proceed like Bulgaria to expel every troublesome Serbian.
Serbia will also lose Kosovo to Albania.
After the peace Serbia will experience something worse than what Bulgaria experienced in OTL after WW1:
- peace treaty similar or worse than the NEULLY one of OTL
- Border will be slightly bigger then Serbia pre-balkans war but with Double population at least.
- all the mining resources or Macedonia, Nish are lost( mainly chromium, bauxite,copper and iron)
- heavy military restriction with a militayr probably reduced to less then 40k troops. no Aircrafts, no tanks or whatever is armored.
Depending on how the Austrian behave in Belgrade the city might remain almost intact despite.. looted. Serbia will become heavily agrarian for the first decade at lest. I can only assume as everything so far that they will go heavily Revanchist like int e Kaissereich TL, with the difference that Greece won't have reasons for revenge... based on to story so far.
Thank you for sharing your perspective. It's something I can work with and appreciate.
Albania
will be annexing the vast majority of Kosovo; this will extend Italy's protectorate.
I don't know if Austria-Hungary will annex or puppetise Serbia yet; my money's on the latter yet I need to do some more research.
Revanchism in Serbia is a given- the question is what could possibly come of it with Austria in total control.
It will also depend on whether or not Romania wants to get involved as well, which isn't guaranteed.
I doubt Romania would get drawn into the Balkans ITTL. As
@Belka DNW pointed out:
They'll probably wait until the russians can't fight back and jump to get Moldovia.
^^^
Wrong dynasty
en.wikipedia.org
This is the one the Austrians would want.
I don't know if there *is* a cadet line or anyone with a matrilineal claim that could be dredged up, but given Austria's preferences, that's what they'd want to pick to be their Serbian puppet.
The Obrenovi are definitely on the list.
Thanks for all the comments guys-- we'll get the next update after the weekend.
italiacoloniale.com
