Italy Shall Not Fight...in WW1

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

What if the Italians did not enter into the first world war? I know this had been done before once or twice, but since thread necromancy has been frowned on lately....but given the other threat that inspired this one, why not?

There has to be a reason for the Italians to stay out, which probably means a decisive show of force by the Austro-Hungarians early in the war, so they don't seem like such easy pickings. This will create butterflies beyond just the Italians staying out, but it is crucial to make this idea work. The most likely POD is that the AH 2nd army stays in the Balkans (well, 3 corps and the attacked Honved divisions), as the 2nd army didn't arrive in time to help in Galicia anyway, but still was caught up in the retreat in September.

This gives AH the manpower to push down the Morava river valley and occupy Serbia all the way into the interior of the nation, depriving them of their economic heartland and the bulk of their population. Though Nish will still hold out in the initial onslaught, it provided only 80 shells a day for the artillery, very few rifles, and no machine guns. The Salonika port remains open though, which means some resupply is possible. This means that throughout August the Serbs are pushed back into the interior, by which time the 2nd army is pulled out entirely, allowing the remaining 5th and 6th armies to hold against the battered Serbs, who now lack their main recruiting areas and still have to hold down the rebellious, recently added territories to the south. Bulgaria is somewhat more likely to join in, but not guaranteed. This way, it looks like the AHs are able to win, but were forced to delay the coup-de-grace, thanks the the Galician situation. They don't lose nearly as much face to the Italians, and the Serbian Front can hold without the Serbs being able to launch the kind of attacks they were able to OTL.


So, Serbia is not beaten, but removed as a major threat to the AHs and the Italians are not as likely to consider the AHs as a push over. By no means does this mean the Italians won't attack, but they have had enough reason to give it a second thought now. The situation in Galicia is roughly the same as OTL, though the AHs have had a morale boost that was missing historically. Now the Germans can make their case properly for knocking Serbia out of the war, as the Serbs are now a much easier target. This will probably require German manpower thanks to the situation in the Carpathians, but that alone with guarantee Bulgarian help. So we now have an earlier Bulgarian entrance into the war, the Serbs are knocked out in March, the path is opened to Turkey, making the Gallipoli lands precarious, and the Salonika Front isn't opened.

At this point Italy would have to be cowed out of thinking about joining the war. The AHs are not a pushover and are only fighting on one front, completely unencumbered by commitments other than the Eastern Front. So Italy stays out of the war, just as Gorlice-Tarnow is starting.

What effects does this have on Italy and the war? No Italian Front frees up a lot of AH resources for use against Russia, meaning that the same burden on their economy and manpower doesn't exist. But then again, neither does the popular war that helped solidify AH will. However, when the Russian Front wraps up, the AHs have no more active fronts to fight on and can focus on demobilization/rebuilding their economy (minus the minor commitments to the Western, Middle Eastern, and perhaps occupations in Ukraine/Balkan Fronts).
 

Paul MacQ

Donor
I have previously asked the question of Both the Ottomans and the Italians staying out.

Italians alone staying out, Has to Quantify a few things.

What is Italy's position on this case of letting Food and Materials through to the Central Powers. I could see an Italy trying to profit from the war and as a neutral; power that has land contact with the central Powers, Will Britain and France include Italy in some sort of Blockade when it has on back of mind , trying to get Italy onside

With there flanks not protected Italy might feel Vulnerable on it's Coasts so might see a continuation of Navy Build up might see the building of the Caracciolo class, completed, Adding to the Threat that Italy Imposes.

As discussed in a couple of Forums Coal will be Italy's biggest vulnerability. And Coal from US has a long way to come

Galacian Campaign with probably still be a massive mess like you said. Serbia out of the War and contact with the Ottomans that includes Rail Traffic being able to get through Big news. But will take a year or so to have full effect. If you reduce to less than 50,000 AH tops left for Occupation Duty in the Balkans. Bulgarians Probably happy to make up rest, and still would not have them fighting Russians. That is a massive increase for force for the Eastern Front.

France will have most of the responsibility for Bottling up the AH Fleet here will be interesting were they are going to be stationed not to appear too much a threat to Italy, Biggest threat now for France is if Italy and AH get friendly just the threat of Both those Fleets combining will cause massive consternation. Italy has a long Vulnerable coast so would see that as a threat both ways.

Air power will also be an interesting Factor AH and the Germans now might be able to prevent the Total Dominance of the Air by the British in the Mid-East in 1917 if the war Continues that long.

No Italy in the War , Might mean some Food gets through to Central Powers that did not OTL and possibly in better shape. Would Italy Profit from the war if Given a Chance. I think so. Selling weapons probably not. Being a channel for Food and some raw materials that cannot be traced , Probably.

Russia being forced into a Peace 6-8 months earlier probable would mean massive changes. I am not so sure a Lenin would be sent into Russia if it was on the Ropes earlier.
 
Last edited:
The Slatemate peace or a marginal CP victory?

Well, wiking, you now more of ww1 than me(marne without moltke is the main evidence) and you make a excellent description of the background for the scenario.

In general, with Italy cowed into neutrality by a more efective(A-H was strong even if someone looks like a ramshackle empire like your said, not for nothing was number six great power power) Austro-Hungary war performance, that wil let Italy open to traffic for the CP(who will be in presurre by Britain with the blackmail of no coal for Italy or a distant blockade too), and help them in the war effort and diplomatically(if Britain try to blockade italy too like netherland that will make the American business to scream and alinate more the USA with the Entente), with more resource and better performance in Eastern front, that will helpt Germany, will fell less exhausted and reduce the starvation a little, and make better decision in the last years of the war, like maybe put in hold the USW to not allineated america and the rest of the neutrals, suport more A-H for a early collapse of russia, more troops for the Ottomans and Bulgarians, and maybe more pressure to the entente with a little more stronger CP, who will:

A) make france more desesperated and make more futile offensive who will anger soldiers and maybe make a true mutiny in france and take advantage for the CP to in a 'future' finnally take paris and force to the negotiation table

or

B) give more life to the CP and make the both side more realisitc of a compromise peace before finnally slaughter their population, who gonna make a 'war' in the 'peace' conferences(Clausewitz: War is the continuation of politics and viceversa).

the Scenario is good, who should work like a complement to Marne without Moltke(i can help you to make collaboratice), and give us another vision about neutrality and the politics in WW1.

Att

Nivek von Beldo
 
Does Italy take the opportunity to occupy Albania while the other powers are distracted? If so will the Serbian army be able to escape through Albania.

Might they also take he opportunity to gobble up Abyssinia - or try to? Perhaps a Second Battle of Adowa?
 
More likely, Albania (or at least the promise to look the other way while italy is invading) will be given to italy by AH as a bribe to keep her neutral.
This because the articles of Triple Alliance explicitly established that in front of an enlaging of AH, an equal enlarging of italy must correspond.
Keeping Italy in the TA (even if neutral in the war would make it less likely to align with the Entente).
Notice that there was an escamotage to teep Italy in the TA while being neutral in the war, since article 5 (IIRC) stated that members were to support other's wars only if they have been discussed and prepared jointly by the countries.
This was the reason used by italy not to declare war to the Entente in 1914: but the same could be used also to keep it in the TA while being neutral
 

Deleted member 1487

Italy had to trade at least with the Entente, mainly due to being dependant on coal imports from England. But beyond that, Italy took advantage of France's need for labor by allowing 80,000 men to migrate to France for industrial jobs to replace the Frenchmen off to war. Italy had plenty of extra labor to export, which I could see happening to a larger degree than historically. Now, Italy neutral also benefits France and Britain to a degree too, as they will now have the resources they spent on prepping and sustaining Italy for use on their own armies. I don't see it making much of a difference in 1915 or most of 1916 though, as Italy added much more than it took away from the Entente war effort.

I could also see Italy profiting off the blockade as well by clandestine trade with the CPs. It wouldn't be hard to do, given the common border, and the CPs being so desperate for food and other important resources, but war contriband I don't see being sent. No finished products, no explicit war materials (i.e. nitrates or steel, at least not in significant quantities), this would all be destined for the Entente, who would be paying top dollar for every last scrap of Italian goods. That and more manpower deals could be made, meaning more Italian labor in France with lots of remitances sent home, instead of African labor. There might even be Italian 'volunteers' serving in the French foreign legion or something.

The Albanian issue is a bit prickly. OTL the Austrians were very careful to keep everyone out of the Balkans, i.e. Bulgaria and Germany, who were blocked from any commitments on the coast. AFAIK this was based on their sense of inferiority to everyone else considering their losses to everyone, which here won't be as much an issue. It would make sense to give Italy Albania, as that would slake their thirst for expansion, without giving up AH territory. The Serbs would probably still be allowed transit, thanks to pressure from the Entente, but the Italians were very unwilling to assist the Serbs OTL despite being allied to them when they fled into Albania. Here, I could see the Serbs being interned instead of released, which would deprive the Entente of that experienced pool of manpower.

Now the major benefit to the Italians being out won't be felt until 1916, but even in 1915 the Gorlice-Tarnow campaign will be stronger without the distraction of the Italian front. Also, the later disasterous Black-Yellow offensive may not be delayed so much, which means the Russians aren't given the time to dig in and integrate replacements that they were able to OTL. So the AHs are able to win and gain confidence instead of having to maintain three fronts. Here they will have only one front.

So, the major deal will be the Eastern Front in 1916; the Brusilov offensive won mainly because Conrad withdrew 12 divisions and most of the heavy artillery from the Eastern Front for his 'Strafexpedition' against Italy. That won't be an issue here, meaning that the AHs, instead of sitting on the defensive against Russia, will be launching their own offensive, probably with German support (however minor). The Russians had not built up major defenses OTL and here the Verdun offensive is still happening, so I still see the Russians trying for an offensive. However, they will be running into the AHs counteroffensive, or will be preempted. I think the AH spoiling attack is more likely given that they were able to launch their Italian offensive in April-May, while the Russians have to recover from the 1915 losses and the Early 1916 losses when they were slaughtered in the Bukowina during the parallel assaults to the Lake Naroch attacks.

This means there is no eviceration of the AH forces, making them much more useful and stable later on, perhaps even allowing them to breech into the Ukraine. This will have a knock on effect in Romania, meaning that nation stays neutral, perhaps entering on the CPs side. At very least, they will probably start trading all their oil and wheat to the CPs after Russia gets yet another bloody nose. This will have a HUGE effect on the war, as Falkenhayn stays in OHL (he was dismissed because the Romanians entered into the war), making Germany much more likely to negotiate a reasonable peace with Russia and probably France at some point.

While Russia won't be knocked out by the AH offensive, it will eliminate their offensive power and probably start to grind down their morale. The Germans will have a free hand to focus on the West, though Ober Ost is likely to have to support the Austrians effort in Ukraine. Without the Italian front draining resources, the Austrians will have something like 500,000 more fighting men against Russia, plus all of their heavy artillery and munitions production (which reached 1.6 million shells a month in 1916). They will outnumber the Russians initially, who will also have a large number of unreliable recruits, a result of the 1915 fiasco and the general dissatisfaction with the war. Expect a reverse of the Brusilov offensive, as the Austrians take massive numbers of prisoners, but get overextended and counterattacked by Russian reenforcments from the northern front. But the Russians are unlikely to have the same successes in stopping the CPs, mainly because their armies are demoralized, more so than the OTL CPs were, and are dealing with another breakthrough a la 1915, which is sure to bring back bad memories.

Now my question is that without the Brusilov offensives and the German commitments there, what happens to the Germans in the West? Historically the Germans took something like 300,000+ casualties in helping stop Brusilov, but here they won't experience anything close to the commitment they did historically, as the Austrians are doing all the heavy lifting, though likely with significant Ober Ost support (something that won't be taking away from the OHL strategic reserve, or require commitments from the West Heer).
 
Negotiate peace for 1917?


Excellent Description of the butterflies or your scenario wiking(again, you should do this an complement to Marne without Moltke or like the butterflies of that?:D).

You said that Italy will be under more pressure in TTL, but again if they were cowed by A-H is less likely to join in the entente, and here with the breaktrought in the Eastern front and the Balkans, even less, they will won free hand in albania... but again better for nothing.

Like your said, with more mens thanks to the performance of A-H, that means that even Verdun can be winnable(again a lesser victory but a great moral boost for germany and a moral blunder for the entente) and with being in a worse position TTL, maybe we gonna have the negotiate peace for 1917(thus making USW and USA irrelevant), that will be a wrestle in the west... but if make good booty for the east(a more stronger A-H will demand Ukranie and rumania as sphere of influence) will check the lost of colonies.

again we need more tactical and strategical details, but with a stronger A-H and Italy cowed into neutrality, we have a victory for CP(who give us a stronger germany and A-H and maybe a more stable middle-east thanks to a surviving and more powerful Ottoman Empire)

Att

Nivek von Beldo

P.S. i have here another variation for CP victory scenario
 
Top