Italy honors triple alliance in 1914

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date
I wouldn't put France and Austria on the same level. True, Italy had some disputes with France such as the "economic war" at the turn of the century and the colonization of Tunisia, but France wasn't a "traditional enemy" of Italy. There wouldn't even be a kingdom of Italy without the french support.
Italy never actually fought France, but during WW2, not even when Rome could not be added to the kingdom thanks to Napoleon's protection. Italy didn't even join Prussia during the 1870 war, when doing so could have delivered to the italians both Rome and Savoy (which is, by the way, a good POD to have an Italy firmly entrenched in Germany'side during WW1, in my opinion).
So I find equiparating France and Austria a bit extreme.

While France was instrumental in the formation of the united Italian state, they followed that up with belligerence and opposition. The two biggies for Italy were the economic war and Tunisia. France made a dedicated effort in the late 19th and early 20th centuries towards crushing the burgeoning Italian economy, to prevent them becoming a rival with dreams of retaking the rest of Savoy. Tunisia had a significant Italian population, but the Italian government was squeezed out by French interested that Italy was too weak to ignore. Italy was so fond of France that they signed a defensive alliance explicitly aimed at France - seems to me that this is a fairly sure sign they were unimpressed with the French.

As for the ottomans, it's true that both sides had a lot to offer, with the central powers in slight advantage, but IIRC until the Goeben arrival, the empire seemed leaning toward neutrality, rather than belligerance. Peace would benefit the entente, but especially the turks.

The Ottoman empire was leaning towards pro-German neutrality, having just signed a number of trade agreements and with the Berlin the Baghdad railway still under construction. OTOH, Goeben arrived virtually as warfare broke out, so it's a little hard to see which way they were gonig to jump. If the Ottomans had remained neutral, then they probably would have run afoul of heavy-handed British attempts to coerce them into being effectively Entente supporters.
 
While France was instrumental in the formation of the united Italian state, they followed that up with belligerence and opposition. The two biggies for Italy were the economic war and Tunisia. France made a dedicated effort in the late 19th and early 20th centuries towards crushing the burgeoning Italian economy, to prevent them becoming a rival with dreams of retaking the rest of Savoy. Tunisia had a significant Italian population, but the Italian government was squeezed out by French interested that Italy was too weak to ignore. Italy was so fond of France that they signed a defensive alliance explicitly aimed at France - seems to me that this is a fairly sure sign they were unimpressed with the French.

It's not my intention to downplay the friction that existed between France and Italy, but you should remember that the so called economic war was solved by the beginning of the century and that in 1914, France, not Germany or Austria, was the pricipal trade partner of Italy. As for Tunisia, it's true that the french occupation in 1881 was seen as a provocation, but it was more an argument in the internal political fight than a foreign policy issue. The invasion of Libya was, for example, decided just to appease the hawkish faction of the parliament and to show that the current goverment (Giolitti) was strong, not for real interest or for a farseeing foreign policy.
The triple alliance was dictated more by the need to find a strong ally (germany) in a moment when the relations with France were sour. But if you read closely about the alliance, you'll note that Italy tried to carve up as much manouvring space as conceded by the letter of the alliance.
 

Eurofed

Banned
The triple alliance was dictated more by the need to find a strong ally (germany) in a moment when the relations with France were sour. But if you read closely about the alliance, you'll note that Italy tried to carve up as much manouvring space as conceded by the letter of the alliance.

Nonetheless, the fact remains that even with that manouvring space, Italian leadership expected/felt bound to side with Germany in any European war, provided that a) they get some decent compensation for A-H gains in the Balkans or b) the war had been started by the Entente. That was the "manouvring space" you speak about, and the change that the PoD needs to address. In OTL, Italy negotiated for those compensations with Austria for a realtively long time, but Vienna stubbornly dragged its feet and even the offer of Trento came too little, too late, when the frustated and exasperated Italian government had started to listen to Britain's generous offers of recognizing all Italian claims. Nonetheless, Italy was mindful of the impact of breaking a long-standing alliance, so they barked up the CPs tree for a while, first.

Therefore, Italy will stay true to the CPs if the PoD provides that 1) Germany recognizes the value of Italian contribution to the war, and moves quickly in the buildup to the war, or even well before the war, to pressure Austria for cession of Trento and Gorizia, and promise all Italian claims on France (this may happen for various reasons, such as German planners realizing that Plan Schliffen may fail without Italian contribution, or that Austria may fail against Russia if they don't have their western border covered, and they need to get Italian compensation covered in order to secure its alliance) or 2) Russia declares war on Austria-Hungary first and France declares war on Germany first, this would bind Italy to the defensive letter of the alliance (this necessarily requires Germany giving up Plan Schliffen and adopting an East First strategy IMO, b/c they realize the logistic problems of the plan or that it shall bring Britain in the war).
 
Nonetheless, the fact remains that even with that manouvring space, Italian leadership expected/felt bound to side with Germany in any European war, provided that a) they get some decent compensation for A-H gains in the Balkans or b) the war had been started by the Entente.

This is absolutely true. Italy would have respected the letter of the alliance, no matter what.
Unfortunately, it would be quite difficult to convince Austria to part from Trieste. The others italians claim (Trento, Gorizia etc...) weren't really crucial to the empire, while Trieste was the last good austrian port and window over mediterrean. It simply was too important economically and military for Austria to let her go.
 

Eurofed

Banned
Unfortunately, it would be quite difficult to convince Austria to part from Trieste. The others italians claim (Trento, Gorizia etc...) weren't really crucial to the empire, while Trieste was the last good austrian port and window over mediterrean. It simply was too important economically and military for Austria to let her go.

This is very true. However, it is also quite true that a timely cession of Trento and Gorizia, plus an abundant dosage of Entente stuff (surely Nice, Savoy, Corsica, Tunisia, Dijbouti, Malta, plus a nice colonial bonus, either eastern Algeria, Cote D'Ivoire, or both) shall almost surely make Italy march for the CPs, even without Trieste. On a stretch, even an exclave of western Istria, but nothing more. Trieste was not the be-all, end-all of Italian aspirations.

Italy wanted to get its irredentist claims, sure, but its ruling class was eager to "stretch its wings" and definitely affirm Italy's status as a top-tier great power by cutting down either Austria or France and affirming Italian hegemony in the western Balkans, the Mediterranean, or both.
 
Italy wanted to get its irredentist claims, sure, but its ruling class was eager to "stretch its wings" and definitely affirm Italy's status as a top-tier great power by cutting down either Austria or France and affirming Italian hegemony in the western Balkans, the Mediterranean, or both.

I agree completely. The italian aspiration would have led to a clash sooner or later with another european power. It would be an analogue to the french-prussian war of 1870.

Anyway, I think that the best way to bring Italy on central powers side is changing the order of the declaration of war. If the entente go on the offensive, the italian goverment could not hide between the letter of the alliance and would have joined the CP.

By the way, in the event of a central power, including Italy, victory, what do you think would be the Balkans asset? Serbia would be probably drawed into the empire' s sphere, but Italy had already interests in both Albania and Montenegro. Could the balkan division lead to even more strife between the two nations?
 

Deleted member 1487

Why is there so much focus on the economic necessity of Trieste? Robin Okey in her seminal book on the Austro-Hungarian Empire mentions that its use, as well as all of the Adriatic ports, were quite limited, as they did not intersect with any major trade lines. In fact the most important port for Austria was the Hamburg! Most of the international trade was conducted down the Elbe to this port city so that they could then have access to the most important markets. The Adriatic ports, namely Trieste, were important for naval bases, ship construction, or local trade, but were not used as major trade hubs. This was part of the economic problems of the Empire, as they had trouble conducting trade except through Germany. Its loss would only be important to naval ship construction and basing rather than severing Austria's connection with the outside world and disrupting trade. In fact, there were other options of basing that were just as good, but Trieste was the best for its strategic location.
 
By the way, in the event of a central power, including Italy, victory, what do you think would be the Balkans asset? Serbia would be probably drawed into the empire' s sphere, but Italy had already interests in both Albania and Montenegro. Could the balkan division lead to even more strife between the two nations?

Very likely. Montenegro and (Greater) Albania are almost sure to fall into the Italian sphere. This with a CP Bulgaria will effectively block Austria-Hungary into what it has, and a probable Serbian puppet. This is almost sure to cause some ammount of friction between Italy and Austria-Hungary. Maybe even between Italy and the Ottomans in the Med.

Im interested in what would be the fate of Greece here? Its almost impossibble for them to join the Entante and declare war to... well everyone within a couple of thousand kilometers, actually.
 
Very likely. Montenegro and (Greater) Albania are almost sure to fall into the Italian sphere. This with a CP Bulgaria will effectively block Austria-Hungary into what it has, and a probable Serbian puppet. This is almost sure to cause some ammount of friction between Italy and Austria-Hungary. Maybe even between Italy and the Ottomans in the Med.

Im interested in what would be the fate of Greece here? Its almost impossibble for them to join the Entante and declare war to... well everyone within a couple of thousand kilometers, actually.

The Albanian government, at that point under the Prince of Wied, would probably like getting some concrete support for his rule. The Prince-Bishop of Montenegro may be less impressed. Bulgaria, one assumes, would want the entire Macedonian region of Serbia. This would box Austria-Hungary in, but this could give additional impetus to the reformist movement through the removal of external threats and easy targets.

IIRC the Greek government split in WW1, with the King and his faction being opposed to any entry into the war, and the Prime Minister being in favour of it, which resulted in the Entente launching a coup and setting up an alternative government. They were obligated by treaty to come to the defence of Serbia if it was attacked by Bulgaria, so a swift victory by the Austrians, before the Bulgarians hop on board, should see them remaining out of it - though you'd have to wonder why the Bulgarians would then get involved at all.
 

Eurofed

Banned
Anyway, I think that the best way to bring Italy on central powers side is changing the order of the declaration of war. If the entente go on the offensive, the italian goverment could not hide between the letter of the alliance and would have joined the CP.

This may done nicely, but it requires a PoD that makes Germany drop Plan Schliffen and adopt a Russia First strategy. This has the additional advantage to Germany and Italy alike that Britain is surely going to remain neutral, at least for a while since they lack a plausible casus belli, and quite possibly for good (if they don't enter the war, Irish Home Rule goes into effect, Ulster is going to explode, and Britain shall be busy at home). So they don't have to worry about the economic effects of British blockade, and can take their time strangling Russia and bleeding France white.

Of course, it may be even nicer if the PoD also ensures that Italy gets its timely guarantees of compensations from Austria, too.

I tentatively propose the following PoD:

1904: A freak accident during a technical meeting of Triple Alliance officers kills several; among the victims, there are Alfred Von Schliffen (it butterflies away namesake plan), Conrad von Hötzendorf (removing an Italophobe to increase Austria's willingness to compromise with Italy), and Luigi Cadorna (not strictly necessary, but losing Italy an utterly crappy future Commander in Chief can only help).

1905-6: When the Entente Cordiale gets signed, Kaiser William II asks the German High Staff to devise a plan for fighting a two-fronts war. After much deliberation, the generals conclude that there is no feasible way to defeat France first: the French defenses in Alsace-Lorraine are too good, crossing through Belgium carries an unacceptable risk of British intervention, and the logistical problems look too great. They conclude that defensive in West and offensive in the East is the only realistic option, to exploit Russia's slow mobilization, even if a relatively long war may be necessary to vanquish Russia first, then France. They also advise that therefore, securing Italian loyalty to the alliance is paramount (to keep French forces stretched and Austria's western back covered), as does securing British neutrality (since Germany, Austria, and Italy would be rather vulnerable to British blockade in case of a long conflict).

1908-09: Austria annexes Bosnia-Hercegovina. Italy complains that it is due some compensation in exchange for Austrian expansion in the Balkans. The German government, eager to get a strong guarantee of Italian loyalty, successfully pressures Vienna to make concessions. In the end, a secret protocol is added to the Triple Alliance pact whereby Austria promises to cede Trento and Gorizia-Gradisca in case of Italian partecipation to a general war on the side of Austria. Moreover, the protocol ensures the allies' support for large Italian gains from French possessions in case of war. Italy reaffirms its committment to support Germany in case of a conflict with France (effectively scrapping the secret guarantee it gave to France in 1902). Moreover, Germany signs a naval pact with Britain, agreeing to limit the rate of its dreadnought-class battleship construction to parity with France or Russia. In exchange, Britain gives a secret guarantee of neutrality if Germany or its allies were to be attacked by a third great power.

1914: Austria-Hungary declares war on Serbia. Russia declares war on Austria-Hungary. Germany declares war on Russia. France declares war on Germany. Italy declares war on France. Germany and Italy take a defensive stance on the western front and send the bulk of their forces against Russia and Serbia. Britain declares neutrality.

An interesting issue is: if Germany takes a defensive posture in the East until Russia is defeated, Italy is going to do likewise. This leaves Italy with a sizable manpower surplus. Part of it is surely going to be used to invade Serbia and Tunisia, but it is surely not going to employ all of the surplus. If Plan Schliffen had existed, the surplus would have been sent to reinforce German positions in Alsace-Lorraine. This is less necessary if Germany is on the defensive there. So, I assume that we going to see a big Italian expeditionary corps fighting alongside Germans on the Eastern Front.

Another question is: with Britain neutral and Italy in the CPs, what is Turkey going to do ? Join the Alliance or stay neutral (I cannot really see Turkey join the Russo-French Entente) ?

By the way, in the event of a central power, including Italy, victory, what do you think would be the Balkans asset? Serbia would be probably drawed into the empire' s sphere, but Italy had already interests in both Albania and Montenegro. Could the balkan division lead to even more strife between the two nations?

Italy is surely going to claim a protectorate over Albania, Kosovo, and Montenegro. Austria is going to keep its stuff, and to make Serbia its puppet, like Romania. More strife is probable, especially if Austria ceded no stuff to ensure its compliance. OTOH, if it did, Italy may more willing to wait and let national domestic strife be the demise of the Habsburg hodgepodge. Whileas a victory in a rather less bloody and expensive WWI (but not a walk in the park, at least a couple years shall be necessary to defeat France and Russia) is going to strenghten Germany and Italy substantially, Austria is going only to win a temporary reprieve to its long-standing troubles. In no long time, Italy is going to become the valued sidekick of the German hegemon, while Austria stagnates. I expect that Germany shall tire out of doing CPR on Austria and listen to Italian and Pan-German calls for a partition within a decade.

Very likely. Montenegro and (Greater) Albania are almost sure to fall into the Italian sphere. This with a CP Bulgaria will effectively block Austria-Hungary into what it has, and a probable Serbian puppet. This is almost sure to cause some ammount of friction between Italy and Austria-Hungary.

True, but as I said above, Italy can afford to wait, make itself the indispensable second-in-command of the German hegemony, and let the Habsburg domestic troubles run its course. Time is on its side.

Maybe even between Italy and the Ottomans in the Med.

Quite possible, esp. if Greece severs links with Britain after the war and seeks Italian patronage. But we could also see friction between Ottomans and Britain in the Med, esp. if the peace treaty left Britain with Egypt and Yemen.

I expect that Germany shall have to exercise some clout to keep its Italian and Ottoman allies bound to a liveable compromise. Differently from Austria-Hungary, which can be easily dealt with through a sensible partition, as soon as Germany sees the uselessness of CPRing the Habsburg zombie, Berlin is going to need both allies. Italy is far more precious economically and strategically, but Turkey is too valuable on its own to alienate. I guess Germany shall be forced to make a kind of mediation not unlike the one America needed to do, to keep both Greece and Turkey in NATO.

There is also the possibility that Turkey may let victory go to its head, and go into a Pan-Islamic rampage against Britain (an unhealthy thing to do, unless Germany and Italy are currently in a Cold War with London for their own reasons) or Greece/Bulgaria, which would require to swat it down.

Im interested in what would be the fate of Greece here? Its almost impossible for them to join the Entante and declare war to... well everyone within a couple of thousand kilometers, actually.

Well, it is true that going Entente, or even Entente-friendly neutral like OTL, is rather suicidal, esp. because Serbia shall fall down very soon and its army completely destroyed. OTOH, going CP and being allies of Turkey, as much as it would be useful for them to gain benevolence after war, is going to be rather uneasy for them.

If they are wise, the Greeks shall lay quiet and suck on the Italo-German teat. If they let "Megali Idea" nationalism go to its heads, they shall make themselves a second Serbia, and be swatted down by a CP "police action".
 
Last edited:

Eurofed

Banned
This would box Austria-Hungary in, but this could give additional impetus to the reformist movement through the removal of external threats and easy targets.

Or push Austria-Hungary further towards the point of no return as domestic strife increases. I'm rather persuaded that victory would just win the Habsburg hodgepodge a temporary reprieve. It is not just going to make Italy stronger and more valuable in German's eyes than Austria, it is also boosting up Pan-Germans in Germany and Austria alike. Moreover, A-H shall be burdened with the unenviable task of keeping Serbia and Romania in line.

IIRC the Greek government split in WW1, with the King and his faction being opposed to any entry into the war, and the Prime Minister being in favour of it, which resulted in the Entente launching a coup and setting up an alternative government.

Well, ITTL an Entente alliance is not going to be a serious alliance. Unless, with the Serbian army gone, the British are willing and able to deploy a large expeditionary corps in Salonicco (the French surely have not men to spare).

They were obligated by treaty to come to the defence of Serbia if it was attacked by Bulgaria,

Methinks that this is one treaty obligation they would be willing to forget. Fighting Italy, Austria, Turkey, and Bulgaria would be suicidal, unless the British can pull a second BEF fro Greece from their butt.

so a swift victory by the Austrians, before the Bulgarians hop on board, should see them remaining out of it - though you'd have to wonder why the Bulgarians would then get involved at all.

True. This however means Romania may be even more willing to join the Entente (not that they are going to fare any better than OTL) and that Turkey may get uppity after the war, if neither Bulgaria nor Greece were in the CPs.
 
The more this thread goes on the more I'm convinced the only way to get Italy in the war as a German ally is for Austria-Hungary to join the Entente.:D
 

Eurofed

Banned
The more this thread goes on the more I'm convinced the only way to get Italy in the war as a German ally is for Austria-Hungary to join the Entente.:D

That is wholly doable (frankly, the decision to pick Austria rather than Italy as the default main ally ranks among the most disastrous foreign policy decisions of the Kaiserreich, only second to picking a useless naval pissing contest with Britain) but it requires a different, earlier PoD.

However, you are greately exaggerating the difficulties here. Italy genuinely admired and liked Germany as an ally, they only asked Berlin to wrangle some decent concessions from the useless Habsburg instead of spoiling them all the time. Italian demands were moderate.
 
Despite the usual claims of Britwankers that the invincible RN can win all the wars and defeat anyone quickly and effortlessly with blockades and coastal raids, Italian economy won't be nowhere as easy to strangle by British blockade as others seem to think (not really more than the other CPs, anyway). Because pretty much all the Italian economy that matters is concentrated north of Rome, where the railroad network is good and can keep the backbone of the war economy together. Italy is much more self-sufficient about foodstuff than the other CPs and German coal can fuel Italian industry. There is going to be some significant hardship, but it is nothing that the Italian WWI semi-dictatorial war government can't manage. Yeah, Sardinia is pratically lost for the duration of the war, but it's no big loss.

And the Entente has very few significant "bargaining chips" towards the Ottomans. They look like the weaker party in this lineup, Serbia and its entire army shall go down very quick, which means that Greece shall be a CP-friendly neutral, and the CP shall control the entire Balkans. In this scenario, Turkey has the opportunity to inflict a telling blow to its old arch-enemy Russia, and seize plenty of stuff in Caucaus and Persia. And if the Entente can offer Libya, the CPs can offer Egypt and Cyprus, plus stuff in Caucasus and Persia. Most likey, the Ottomans join the CPs soon, which means Britain now has all the Middle Eastern theaters to man, besides helping overstrenched and manpower-starved France.

The Ottomans could also use the opportunity after Bulgarian entry to inflict a crushing blow in western Thrace and Rumelia. and not face fighting the Russians in Armenia or the British in Arabia / Palestine... but the Bulgarians in the Balkans. The Ottomans can hardly do worse....and of course the Entente does not have to force the straits to get to Russia in this case.
 
That is wholly doable (frankly, the decision to pick Austria rather than Italy as the default main ally ranks among the most disastrous foreign policy decisions of the Kaiserreich, only second to picking a useless naval pissing contest with Britain) but it requires a different, earlier PoD.

However, you are greately exaggerating the difficulties here. Italy genuinely admired and liked Germany as an ally, they only asked Berlin to wrangle some decent concessions from the useless Habsburg instead of spoiling them all the time. Italian demands were moderate.

moderate IS DEPENDENT ON YOUR POINT OF VIEW.....in the mind of the Italians of course.... but not the Hapsburgs who had controlled the areas in question for CENTURIES.
 

Eurofed

Banned
The Ottomans could also use the opportunity after Bulgarian entry to inflict a crushing blow in western Thrace and Rumelia. and not face fighting the Russians in Armenia or the British in Arabia / Palestine... but the Bulgarians in the Balkans. The Ottomans can hardly do worse....and of course the Entente does not have to force the straits to get to Russia in this case.

Assuming that Bulgaria joins the CPs before Turkey committs to either side, which is far from granted (IOTL, the reverse happened).

moderate IS DEPENDENT ON YOUR POINT OF VIEW.....in the mind of the Italians of course.... but not the Hapsburgs who had controlled the areas in question for CENTURIES.

The Habsburg already committed themselves to give Italy a compensation if they expanded in the Balkans, and have defaulted on that pledge so far. If Italians have to spill its blood in a war that Austria started (admittedly, with a good justification, and Italy stands to profit rather more than Austria by crushing the Entente in the long run, and it has some stake in crushing Serbian expansionism, which threatens its Adriatic interests), it is only fair they make true on their pledge.

Moreover, an historical claim harkening back to feudal times, on lands that on the most part, aren't exactly enthusiastic to stay under the Habsburg or scared of joining Italy, isn't the strongest argument in the world, in the age of nationalism. The Habsburg empire is the worst walking anachronism in Europe, and Germany and Italy are forced to fight and defend it, owing to one of the dumbest foreign policy choices ever of the Kaiserreich. Far better not to get too arrogant about the value of moth-eatern feudal property titles on lands that aren't exactly vital to the empire, and pay their due. Italian loyalty to the Alliance holds the key to CP victory and immediate survival of the Habsburg anachronism (even if the long term is going to be another matter entirely).
 
moderate IS DEPENDENT ON YOUR POINT OF VIEW.....in the mind of the Italians of course.... but not the Hapsburgs who had controlled the areas in question for CENTURIES

Not really, quite a realistic assesment, since those regions were not only not vital to the empire, but neither economically important (a part from Trieste, I'm not completely sold to wiking's opinion).
 
Top