Italy seizes Tripoli 1890

Italy was mightily pissed off when France took Tunis in 1881. Under the leadership of the Franco-phobe Francesco Crispi, during the latter half of 1890 until he left office in January 1891, Crispi agitated for the Green light from Britain and his Triple Alliance partners Germany and Austro-Hungary. Apart from vague promises nothing was forthcoming. In an attempt to force his allies hands, Crispi bluffed that he would make a deal with France over Tripoli in return for leaving the Triple Alliance.

What would France do if Britain and Germany fall for the ruse and officially sanction the occupation in order to keep Italy onside?

What if they don't, and Crispi calls their bluff?
 
In a one on one, wouldn't France beat Italy? Fairly easily at that. So Italy really needs to activate the Triple alliance, and have Germany (and probably AH) help them fend off France. Which could easily drag in the rest and make it an early world war.

If they don't pile in, then France humiliates Italy entirely. Likely no real border changes, but Italy is damaged and mad at everybody, since France beat it like a drum and their allies didn't back up their 'rightful claims'.

I don't really a scenario where France backs down to Italy.

Maybe a case where Italy and Germany jointly bully France, and both Britain and Russia refuse to back France. It is before a formal treaty with France, so maybe. But France might still risk it anyway, by seizing Tunis back and holding the line in the Alps and Rhine.

Aside from war, it could spark a conference and the Great Powers force a compromise on the two.
 
If getting a Bosnia-like agreement towards Tripoli (Italian administration but de jure still an Ottoman possession) will normalize the relations with Italy, i think that Paris will go for it...but it will also mean officially forfeit any claim towards Tunisia, basically going for the old proposal to accept French possession of Tunisi in exchange of the international acceptance of italian possession of Libya.
All other powers can also go for a treaty like that after some diplomatic work
 
If France beats Italy, and Italy has no backing, I think they take Sardinia (wanting it to protect Tunis) and Eritrea (which was new at the time, bordered French Djibouti, and was disorganized) if they want to.

They also probably take something similar to what they took in 1947, very minor slivers from the frontier.
 
If France beats Italy, and Italy has no backing, I think they take Sardinia (wanting it to protect Tunis) and Eritrea (which was new at the time, bordered French Djibouti, and was disorganized) if they want to.

They also probably take something similar to what they took in 1947, very minor slivers from the frontier.

Who in gods name is going to accept a French Conquest of Sardinia? Not Germany at least. It will lead to a general war in Europe and France has no Russian or British allies yet.
 
Italy was mightily pissed off when France took Tunis in 1881. Under the leadership of the Franco-phobe Francesco Crispi, during the latter half of 1890 until he left office in January 1891, Crispi agitated for the Green light from Britain and his Triple Alliance partners Germany and Austro-Hungary. Apart from vague promises nothing was forthcoming. In an attempt to force his allies hands, Crispi bluffed that he would make a deal with France over Tripoli in return for leaving the Triple Alliance.

What would France do if Britain and Germany fall for the ruse and officially sanction the occupation in order to keep Italy onside?

What if they don't, and Crispi calls their bluff?

The situation in 1911 was different that of 1890. There was no large hostility from Britain against Germany or an entente to divide the Central Powers. Besides, the UK was diplomatically isolated due to the Boer wars in South Africa. It could work both ways (getting Italy to get them out of their isolation or support the Ottomans in the strategically important position as well as the railroad concessions).

But assuming they bluffed, It depends on if Italy is not going to get any help. If Italy has no green light from the British and the French then they have a little chance to succeed. In OTL, Italy spent way too much for Libya which pretty much had large consequences later on. Which may be avoided in an altered WW1 (Early invasion of Libya = butterflied away WW1 of OTL).

Abdul Hamid II was a diplomatic genius. I assume he would try to lure in other Great Powers making the situation for Italy harder. Assuming he avoided war in his 33 years rule in the very dire state he could have avoided this as well. But if he didn't... well Abdul Hamid II probably gets deposed by the Constitutionalists should the war end up in a failure.
 
Who in gods name is going to accept a French Conquest of Sardinia? Not Germany at least. It will lead to a general war in Europe and France has no Russian or British allies yet.
It would be the most controversial part of the peace treaty but I really don't think Germany is going to throw down over something in the Mediterranean seeing change. It might be more likely that the French make Sardinia a protectorate. The key is that they would want to prevent anything that blocks the sea route from Toulon to Tunis.
 
If Italy is cutting a deal with France in which they both recognize one another's possessions (France - Tunisia and Italy - Tripoli) I failed to see what anybody is going to do about it.

The French might be jerks about it and demand Fezzan though.
 
Last edited:
If Italy is cutting a deal with France in which they both recognize one another's possessions (France - Tunisia and Italy - Tripoli) I failed to see what anybody is going to do about it.

The French might be jerks about it and demand Fezzan though.

Again, the situation in 1890 and 1911 were different. The British for example, were in 1911 eager to get Italy out of the Central Powers. There is no such case. France has a German ally that will also border them in North Africa. Accepting a situation does not end it there. There are good reasons it did not work out before 1911 (other than Abdul Hamid II diplomacy avoiding wars...)
 
Why can't Italy get some sliver of Tunisia? Tabarka was a Genoese Island Fortress for a long time, from 1540 to 1742.

Shergui, Gharbi, and Djerba islands also wouldn't be that bad to hand over. What France wants is Tunis, Bizerte, and to not have Tunisia be a staging ground for raids into Algeria - none of these cessions to Italy compromise that really.
 
It would be the most controversial part of the peace treaty but I really don't think Germany is going to throw down over something in the Mediterranean seeing change. It might be more likely that the French make Sardinia a protectorate. The key is that they would want to prevent anything that blocks the sea route from Toulon to Tunis.

Again, Italy has an alliance with Germany. Which means that Germany will not necessarily care about Sardinia but more about keeping Italy in the alliance. Losing Sardinia is a big deal for them. Not going to happen or Germany loses an ally (which is not good for Austria-Hungary with the risk of war against Italy later).
 
Why can't Italy get some sliver of Tunisia? Tabarka was a Genoese Island Fortress for a long time, from 1540 to 1742.

Shergui, Gharbi, and Djerba islands also wouldn't be that bad to hand over. What France wants is Tunis, Bizerte, and to not have Tunisia be a staging ground for raids into Algeria - none of these cessions to Italy compromise that really.

Because Tunisia was given away in 1881. It could have been given to Italy but it wasn't. If it was, a lot of mess would be avoided but it would make France even more of problem. Not that it changed OTL but who could have thought about that in 1878?
 
Top