A neutral Italy in XX century.

What if Italy from begin of XX century had chosen an politic of peace and neutrality?
If the maximum goal was a quiet life?
So,nothing war for Lybia, WW-I, Ethiopia,Spain,WW-II.
And a Swedish style neutrality in cold war.
Would better or worse for Italy and Italians?
 
It would be quite improbable. At the turn of the century, Italy didn't have that political stability or geopolitical safeness that could ensure such politic. The irredentism movement, while not powerful as many believe, was not dead and too many still thought war as necessary to forge a "national spirit". The whole "la guerra sola igiene del mondo" idiocy.

On the other hand is true that many of the italian war in XX century could have been avoided, such as the italian-turkish war. But altering those events would result in severe butterflies over the whole european history. If Italy hadn't conquered Lybia, for example, we would have never probably had the two balkanic wars and, with a different political equilibrium in the "powder keg of Europe", WW1 would have been completely different and so on so forth.

Finally, even if Italy could have avoided all the majors involvements of XX century, I don't see how could have avoided some kind of war in the colonies, as many other colonial powers had to face.

To get to your question, though, I think that a neutral Italy would have been a much more rich and developed country than OTL. The degree of destruction brought forth by WW2 nearly levelled Italy as industrial nation, while economy nearly collapsed thanks to war expenses. Not to mention the highest price of all: the thousands of italians died for nothing...
 
Considering how expensive her "colonies" proved, Italy would probably be better off without them. Only keeping Libya post-oil discovery would have made them profitable.

Assuming I-T war as OTL, if say a continued Giolittian Italy stays neutral then we could very well see a CP victory as AH will likely be able to contain *Bruselev (sp?) and crush Serbia. Call it a kinder, gentler *Brest-Litvok by 1917 and negotiated peace in the west soon after. Germany implements their "*Common Market" type idea...maybe no WW2? Perhaps Italy eventually joins or makes deal with this early "EU". Better for Italy, likely, since no massive WWI casualties or debt and later trade prospects.
 
It would be quite improbable. At the turn of the century, Italy didn't have that political stability or geopolitical safeness that could ensure such politic. The irredentism movement, while not powerful as many believe, was not dead and too many still thought war as necessary to forge a "national spirit". The whole "la guerra sola igiene del mondo" idiocy.
Small miniorities.
The Carabinieri's guns could easily solve the problem.
The great mayority of Italian peoples demand only a quiet life.
On the other hand is true that many of the italian war in XX century could have been avoided, such as the italian-turkish war. But altering those events would result in severe butterflies over the whole european history. If Italy hadn't conquered Lybia, for example, we would have never probably had the two balkanic wars and, with a different political equilibrium in the "powder keg of Europe", WW1 would have been completely different and so on so forth.
But maybe for the better.

Finally, even if Italy could have avoided all the majors involvements of XX century, I don't see how could have avoided some kind of war in the colonies, as many other colonial powers had to face.
Well,without Lybia, Italy had only part of Somalia,and Eritrea that in those times were quiet places.

To get to your question, though, I think that a neutral Italy would have been a much more rich and developed country than OTL. The degree of destruction brought forth by WW2 nearly levelled Italy as industrial nation, while economy nearly collapsed thanks to war expenses. Not to mention the highest price of all: the thousands of italians died for nothing...
And if you add destructions,war expenses and victims of
Lybia,WW-I,counter-insurrection in Lybia,war in Ethiopia,war in Spain...........
War is a very bad bargain.
 
Considering how expensive her "colonies" proved, Italy would probably be better off without them. Only keeping Libya post-oil discovery would have made them profitable.

Assuming I-T war as OTL, if say a continued Giolittian Italy stays neutral then we could very well see a CP victory as AH will likely be able to contain *Bruselev (sp?) and crush Serbia. Call it a kinder, gentler *Brest-Litvok by 1917 and negotiated peace in the west soon after. Germany implements their "*Common Market" type idea...maybe no WW2? Perhaps Italy eventually joins or makes deal with this early "EU". Better for Italy, likely, since no massive WWI casualties or debt and later trade prospects.
Like the Italy saved the world. :rolleyes:
 

Cook

Banned
They would definitely have been better off.

They’d probably still me a monarchy now if they’d done so, not that that is any great thing, just an observation.
 
Small miniorities.
The Carabinieri's guns could easily solve the problem.
The great mayority of Italian peoples demand only a quiet life.

Still, they managed to get Italy into war. The large majority was for peace, granted, but Italy wasn't a democracy, unfortunately.

Well,without Lybia, Italy had only part of Somalia,and Eritrea that in those times were quiet places.

But those areas got indipendence right after WW2 (more or less, Erythrea had to fight pretty hard to get her). If Italy stays neutral, Somalia and Erythrea will still be colonies in the fifties. You could suppose a bout of far-sightedness by the italian goverment and a peaceful transition, but given how much money and blood had been poured there I doubt it. Besides there was quite a settlers presence there.

And if you add destructions,war expenses and victims of
Lybia,WW-I,counter-insurrection in Lybia,war in Ethiopia,war in Spain...........War is a very bad bargain.

Agreed.

?Could Italy have lost the Italian-Turkish War?

No, pratically impossible, unless you suppose some POD in the ottoman empire few years before.

Italy did have some setbacks during occupations, but they were due to the lack of preparation of the army (the whole thing had been rushed) and the false information regarding the defenses and the local population's attitude toward italians.
The ottoman empire, on the other hand, did not have a fleet that could match the italian one. In other words the ottomans could not reinforce Lybia in any significant manner: even the turkish officers had to travel with their own devices to get in Lybia. The italian conquest was only a matter of time.
 
Still, they managed to get Italy into war. The large majority was for peace, granted, but Italy wasn't a democracy, unfortunately.
Before the fascism Italy was a democracy,although was a authoritarian democracy.
But the point is not this.
The problem was that the democratics and pacifist political forces (cattolics and socialdemocratics) were divided.
If win the part of establishment aganist military adventures and (most important thing) we have a King that endorse they,
in that case the support of the mayority of Italian peoples is determinant.


But those areas got indipendence right after WW2 (more or less, Erythrea had to fight pretty hard to get her). If Italy stays neutral, Somalia and Erythrea will still be colonies in the fifties. You could suppose a bout of far-sightedness by the italian goverment and a peaceful transition, but given how much money and blood had been poured there I doubt it. Besides there was quite a settlers presence there.
I see a quiet decolonization in 60s.
 
I'd think Eritrea and Somalia might be able to quietly decolonize...possibly with any Italian settlers able to live there still without much risk of being forced out later (assuming loyalty oath to the new native governments). While Italy resorted to extreme means to "pacify" populations in the short term, the Italian settlers in the long term generally lived on a much more equitable basis with the natives than in other European powers' colonies. We might see something more akin to the Philippines than Zimbabwe or OTL Somalia.

Assuming the coming global climate changes that lead to OTL's Ethiopian and Somali famines don't totally destabilize everything to OTL hell...
 

Cook

Banned
If Italy hadn’t invaded Ethiopia the whole horn of Africa may have remained stable right through to the modern era.
 
Top