1917: Italian Front collapses

MrHola

Banned
Was there any way in 1917 for the Italian Front to crumble? What I mean is that the Italian govenrment sues for peace. What would happen next? Would this interfere with the rise of Mussolini?
 
I don't know enough about Italian politics in the 1910s to comment on that aspect, but I think that you'd have to look there to find a POD that gets Italy out in '17. OTL, the Italian front DID collapse that year, with the Germans and Austro-Hungarians driving from Gorizia to the Piave after two years of stalemate. Given that, it's almost ASB that the Italians held out IOTL!! :p
 
Still, the austrians were unable to conquer a single important italian city. If they had made it to Verona or the Po Valley, though...
 

MrHola

Banned
So, if the Austrians managed to get, say, Verona after the Battle of Caparetto, Italy would exit the war?
 
Likely. However you wouldn't see some massive territorial shift in favor of Austria Hungary , in 1917 it was on the brink of collapse , for many reasons that I don't have to name , and would likely settle with war debts , some reparations, and possibly some naval rights for Germany in Italian East African Colonies.
 
So, if the Austrians managed to get, say, Verona after the Battle of Caparetto, Italy would exit the war?

Only taking Verona would not be enough. Holding onto it, however, might do the trick. Verona is an extremely important spot, since it lies in the junction of the two natural ways that join Milan and Venice, and Italy and the Brenner Pass. Controlling Verona, the CP essentially control the gate of all the communication ways in northern Italy, and even if it is not enough to force the Italians to the peace table, sweeping Lombardy and the Po Valley is now much easier, together with giving the CP the initiative: they can attack anywhere in northern Italy, while, if the Italians want to take back the lost terrain, their only option would be to retake Verona. This puts Italy in a very difficult strategic position. And I am not even entering into the morale blow that losing two historic cities such as Verona and Venice would be for the Italians.

Worse, Verona is at the heart of the italian industrial area. I don't know about 1917, but today the plain between Milan and Venice is the most densely industrialized region in all of Europe. :eek:
 
It is quite likely that the fall of this area would lead to the collapse of the Italian government and the emergence of one that was willing to make peace at any terms.
 
Likely. However you wouldn't see some massive territorial shift in favor of Austria Hungary , in 1917 it was on the brink of collapse , for many reasons that I don't have to name , and would likely settle with war debts , some reparations, and possibly some naval rights for Germany in Italian East African Colonies.
If Italy leaves the War in 1917, then AH has only the Balkan Front. and a tremendous moral boost.
AH removes some divisions [not all] from Italy and sends them to reinforce the Balkans.
Germany removes it's Troops from AH, and sends them West.

France and Britain have had a Tremendous moral Loss, and a Public perception that the Allies are loosing the war.
This extra German Divisions and allied perception may be enuff to turn a OTL Allied Victory into a ATL CP Victory.
This would start to Snowball, till political pressure force Britain and France to seek a ceasefire.
 
Only taking Verona would not be enough. Holding onto it, however, might do the trick. Verona is an extremely important spot, since it lies in the junction of the two natural ways that join Milan and Venice, and Italy and the Brenner Pass. Controlling Verona, the CP essentially control the gate of all the communication ways in northern Italy, and even if it is not enough to force the Italians to the peace table, sweeping Lombardy and the Po Valley is now much easier, together with giving the CP the initiative: they can attack anywhere in northern Italy, while, if the Italians want to take back the lost terrain, their only option would be to retake Verona. This puts Italy in a very difficult strategic position. And I am not even entering into the morale blow that losing two historic cities such as Verona and Venice would be for the Italians.

Worse, Verona is at the heart of the italian industrial area. I don't know about 1917, but today the plain between Milan and Venice is the most densely industrialized region in all of Europe. :eek:

Strategically that's sound. As for industry, back in 1917 it was very different. While Lombardy north of Milan already had an industrial tradition of significance by then, Veneto was agrarian, and so poor that peasants emigrated.
 
Last edited:
Just a thought, but Italy kind of did collapse in WWI. Caporetto was an unmitigated disaster for the time period. There really weren't too many offensives in WWI which were as successful, and I can't think of many examples of a nation hanging in the war after such a sudden, devastating blow. Italy collapsing after Caporetto is possible, perhaps eve likely (especially if verona falls). But it is noteworthy to remember that, somehow, they did manage to hang on , enough to win (with substantial help) at Vittorio veneto.
 

Deleted member 1487

Capretto limits of advance were all that the Austrians were logisitically capable of at the time. They just could not go further without a pause. Now if the Italians were to continue to flee and were not stiffened at the Piave, then I could see something happen, but as it was, once they regrouped behind the river, they stayed solid for the rest of the war and got quite good by the time it ended.
 
Just a thought, but Italy kind of did collapse in WWI. Caporetto was an unmitigated disaster for the time period. There really weren't too many offensives in WWI which were as successful, and I can't think of many examples of a nation hanging in the war after such a sudden, devastating blow.

Romania. Oh, that's too short. Well, Romania.
 
Capretto limits of advance were all that the Austrians were logisitically capable of at the time. They just could not go further without a pause. Now if the Italians were to continue to flee and were not stiffened at the Piave, then I could see something happen, but as it was, once they regrouped behind the river, they stayed solid for the rest of the war and got quite good by the time it ended.

Just to say I agree. Note the allies of Italy thought the same, in fact they sent help for that regrouping.
 

Redbeard

Banned
Capretto limits of advance were all that the Austrians were logisitically capable of at the time. They just could not go further without a pause. Now if the Italians were to continue to flee and were not stiffened at the Piave, then I could see something happen, but as it was, once they regrouped behind the river, they stayed solid for the rest of the war and got quite good by the time it ended.

The Austro-Hungarians by 1917 were not especially handicapped - logistically or otherwise, but all WWI armies had severe difficulties advancing in force beyond the range of the initial artillery positions and railheads. That is why no major city fell to anybody in WWI - not even in November 1918 on the west front (if we for a moment forget Belgium and the East Front).

But as the German army collapsed in November 1918, the Italian was very close in late October 1917, and only a combination of luck, foreign intervention and very brutal effort to resurrect order by the Italian commander Cadorno (described in Hemmingway's "Farewell to Arms") saved the Italians. Lust small butterflies might be ebough to change that into a collapse like the German in 1918 -the Entente armies were not any more capable of sustaining an offensive in 1918 than the Austro-Hungarian in 1917.

Anyway, if the Italians leave the war, the CP spring offensive on the west front will have a fair chance of succeeding. Not only will a handful or two German Divisions be freed, but also a much larger number of good quality A-H Divisions. It must be remembered that the Caporetto offensive, was A-H lead and with most forces being A-H. By 1917 A-H was in no way collapsing, we have to go beyond summer 1918 before the cracking seriously started, and only by October was the Empire doomed, as the Army melted away. As long as the KuK Army was intact - the Empire would live on - but no army - no Empire, and no matter what century.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard
 
Just a thought, but Italy kind of did collapse in WWI. Caporetto was an unmitigated disaster for the time period. There really weren't too many offensives in WWI which were as successful, and I can't think of many examples of a nation hanging in the war after such a sudden, devastating blow. Italy collapsing after Caporetto is possible, perhaps eve likely (especially if verona falls). But it is noteworthy to remember that, somehow, they did manage to hang on , enough to win (with substantial help) at Vittorio veneto.

They won at Vittorio Veneto with modest Allied help in men, while this help was instrumental for ammunitions and resources (coal ad iron, first and foremost). It's hard to accept, but Italya ctually managed to win WWI, if only when the Austro-Hungarians were on the verge of collpasing from the inside. The very offensive of Vittorio Veneto was hastily launched because they feared being "deprived" of actual victory by the collapse of the empire.
 
If Italy had collapsed in 1917 as well as Russia then I think that morale in Britain and france would have sunk leading to a willingness to reach a peace settlement. At the sametime the US might have deceided not to enter the war but to encourage a peace settlement.
 
But as the German army collapsed in November 1918, the Italian was very close in late October 1917, and only a combination of luck, foreign intervention and very brutal effort to resurrect order by the Italian commander Cadorno (described in Hemmingway's "Farewell to Arms")


Field Marshal Luigi Cadorna
 
If Italy had collapsed in 1917 as well as Russia then I think that morale in Britain and france would have sunk leading to a willingness to reach a peace settlement. At the sametime the US might have deceided not to enter the war but to encourage a peace settlement.
The British could pump in more troops from say the Middle East; they already had some troops there. My grandfather fought on the Italian Front.
 
Top