Italy remains neutral in World War II. What happens to its territories and colonies?

Lusitania

Donor
The thing is that under a system of Italian fascist in power the right to vote is based on limiting the people choice on my to select candidates. Therefore while not democracy the people will not have an opportunity to select candidates who be in support of separation.
 

marathag

Banned
The big issue with Libya is the oil revenue. Whose profit centre is it? If Italy is funneling most of the revenue to the peninsula, people living in Libya will feel like something is being taken from them.

It would be like the development of Eastern Saudi Arabia when the US did deals with Ibn Saud.

The US built infrastructure, because there was nothing to support the oilfield workers. Brand new cities would have to be built.

So you would have well paid people in an almost empty land in a brand new city with all the modern conveniences Italy could provide, so you would have Cafes, Football fields and Pools.

Want the high life? Locals would be hired, and it would beat herding goats
 

marathag

Banned
Oh? How many oil companies have their head offices in Alaska?

Not a great example, since all the Majors had the HQ set for decades before Oil was discovered in Alaska.
Rockefeller had his first HQ in Cleveland, Ohio, after taking 5 years to acquire thirty oil refineries in the Cleveland area. After more mergers and expansion, he moved the HQ to New York City fifteen years later
 
Libya was the model colony of an extremely dirigist nation, who invested a lot of money & care in uprooting people and bringing them to new, well-prepared Quarta Sponda homes.

Any separatist ideal will easily need a few dozen years to start, as native Italian Libyans become a thing.
 
Also, Italian Libyans might want to remain part of Italy to shield them against Egypt, Algeria and Chad (or whatever country emerges in the south), as a white colony among actual African countries...
 
Assuming WWII otherwise goes pretty much as in OTL, Mussolini would likely declare war on Germany in early 1945, just to have a place on the UN table.
Italy had a permanent seat in the League of Nations, so it could get one in the UN.

In 1945 Italy will be the strongest country in the world not working on a war economy.
That will be important.
How much food can it export?

If British Somalia becomes independent and Italian Somalia does not, things could get very bloody.


Neutral Italy will very likely hang on to Southern Tyrol, so what if Hitler starts implementing his resettlement plan in 1941 or 1942, making its inhabitants move East? ( Maybe not Crimea as intended, but possible)
 
It would be like the development of Eastern Saudi Arabia when the US did deals with Ibn Saud.

The US built infrastructure, because there was nothing to support the oilfield workers. Brand new cities would have to be built.

So you would have well paid people in an almost empty land in a brand new city with all the modern conveniences Italy could provide, so you would have Cafes, Football fields and Pools.

Want the high life? Locals would be hired, and it would beat herding goats
Saudia Arabia gets the oil and it's profit.

I suppose the Italian Libyans would never be unhappy if they get the revenue.

Again, Alaska is a net recipient of federal funds.

Also, Italian Libyans might want to remain part of Italy to shield them against Egypt, Algeria and Chad (or whatever country emerges in the south), as a white colony among actual African countries...
What if Italian on the peninsula don't want to pay for that? What if they get tired dealing with the African issues?

Diverging needs.

I'm bringing these questions up because there is a tendency to assume that if Italy gets the oil it will be set for life. Reality isn't so simple.

Other issue to consider.
  • Possible Dutch disease
  • Over reliance on oil revenues
  • Oil price shocks destroying Italian finances
  • A fascist dictator using the funds for personal project to the detriment of the nation
Now it is possible for Italy to avoid these issues with good management, but becoming reliant on a commodity can allow people to brush over issue that arise during the good times.
 

marathag

Banned
Saudia Arabia gets the oil and it's profit.

I suppose the Italian Libyans would never be unhappy if they get the revenue.

Again, Alaska is a net recipient of federal funds.
Alaskan residents had been getting a Check from the State from the Oil Profits each year, and really don't care that more Federal money flows in, they have no State income tax or Sales tax.


  • Possible Dutch disease
  • Over reliance on oil revenues
  • Oil price shocks destroying Italian finances

While Oil would be profitable, Italy has Manufacturing in the North, and had large programs trying to modernize the South. Postwar undamaged ATL Italy would still boom, even with the Autarky the Moose had been working on. His corporatist model has got past the Depression with little damage to the Economy, with the State owned industry was only 2nd to that of the USSR. They just took over failing businesses and added them to State encouraged cartels.

from the wiki
By 1925, the Fascist government had "embarked upon an elaborate program" that included food supplementary assistance, infant care, maternity assistance, general healthcare, wage supplements, paid vacations, unemployment benefits, illness insurance, occupational disease insurance, general family assistance, public housing and old age and disability insurance

Oil Revenues would keep those solvent
A fascist dictator using the funds for personal project to the detriment of the nation

The Moose really didn't act like your typical 3rd World Dictator. His vanity projects didn't really hurt Italy, other than his major mistake of entering WWII in 1940. That lit the fuze that would wreck Italy: and didn't happen in this TL
 

marathag

Banned
Could Italy be offered British and French Somaliland in return for declaring war on Germany?
I think simply accepting the fait accompli on their earlier adventures in Africa, I saw nothing on them wanting more territory.

Now promising to supply coal and oil, and ending the economic and financial sanctions that the LoN put forth in 1936, that's a whole better carrot to offer
 
Italy would probably keep some possessions and lose others. Any possessions with high populations and low GDP they are going to lose. They're not going to lose Libya, because in all honesty, a third of the population of Libya probably would have been Italian by the 1960s. Then there's the oil...
 
I think they might be able to hold onto Libya but Ethiopia would be harder to keep unless the Italian goes to drastic mesure...
 
Italy was well on its way to integrating Eritrea, and Somalia was very peaceful and could likely be spun off as a sort of dominion. Ethiopia is the only west African colony that will give Italy any grief in the short term.
 
Just after the end of WWII, Italy would hold on to all of its colonies. The AOI, Italian West Africa, is a hotbed of guerrillas, and definitely a net loss, but they'll hold on to that too. The rest is reasonably peaceful, under an iron-fisted rule.
Italy was well on its way to integrating Eritrea, and Somalia was very peaceful and could likely be spun off as a sort of dominion. Ethiopia is the only west African colony that will give Italy any grief in the short term.
...
Ok what's going on here?
 
But to get a neutral Italy you might need to get rid or Mussolini first.

Not set in stone. Pact of steel aside, should Benny be a little bit more of a vulture (one can still attack a capitulated france or demand things without a drop of blood in the negotiations) they could have sit out the whole affair with, even with shenigans on the balkans. Bad news for the japanese tough..
 
Not set in stone. Pact of steel aside, should Benny be a little bit more of a vulture (one can still attack a capitulated france or demand things without a drop of blood in the negotiations) they could have sit out the whole affair with, even with shenigans on the balkans. Bad news for the japanese tough..
But possibly good news if you live in Hiroshima or Nagasaki...
 
Why would Italy have veto power? I don't think Italy would be powerful enough to have an UN Security Council seat. And, I don't see why any other country would want it to have an UN Security Council seat. The Soviets, obviously, would be against it and the USA would have no interest in it because they already have a seat and France and the UK also do.

Also, the "Big Five" were not only Great Powers but also part of the Allies. That would not be true of a neutral Italy. They would not only be not powerful enough but not part of the winning side.
 
Top