Modern Austria with South Tyrol

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

How does the modern nation of Austria retain south tyrol? Note, I mean German speaking south tyrol, not Italian speaking Trentino.
 
Well, the easiest way I could think of is an agreement between Austria and Italy in 1914. Basically austrians accept italian claims on Trentino and Friuli (probably minus Trieste, or giving Trieste a special status) in exchange for italian entry in war on Central powers side. This division could follow the language border rather than the geographical one. Indipendently by the the war outcome, Austria would probably retain South Tyrol.
 
Well, the easiest way I could think of is an agreement between Austria and Italy in 1914. Basically austrians accept italian claims on Trentino and Friuli (probably minus Trieste, or giving Trieste a special status) in exchange for italian entry in war on Central powers side. This division could follow the language border rather than the geographical one. Indipendently by the the war outcome, Austria would probably retain South Tyrol.

I would agree, provided that Italy entered the war on the CP side.
However, it's not a given forever: if A-H goes into a spin and splinters, the issue would come up again, because who holds South Tyrol (or Alto Adige, giving it the Italian name) controls the Alpine watershed.
 
Well, the easiest way I could think of is an agreement between Austria and Italy in 1914. Basically austrians accept italian claims on Trentino and Friuli (probably minus Trieste, or giving Trieste a special status) in exchange for italian entry in war on Central powers side. This division could follow the language border rather than the geographical one. Indipendently by the the war outcome, Austria would probably retain South Tyrol.

Not possible. Anti Austrian sentiment was sky high and the Allies would later offer much much more then that, and a chance the get back at the hated enemy. The Italians would ask what the Allies had to offer, get a similar proposal to OTL, and join the Allies.
 
However if Trentino and Istria where offered for neutrality, I belive that Italy will remain out of the war, happly profiting of both sides need of industrial supplies.
 
However if Trentino and Istria where offered for neutrality, I belive that Italy will remain out of the war, happly profiting of both sides need of industrial supplies.

That might be possible, but I dont think that Italian pride could stand for it. Remember, they also wanted Savoy, Nice, Dalamatia, and lots of territory in Africa.
 
That might be possible, but I dont think that Italian pride could stand for it. Remember, they also wanted Savoy, Nice, Dalamatia, and lots of territory in Africa.

Savoy and Nice were not exactly the hottest topic in 1914-15.
Trento and Trieste were at the top of the list, with Istria and Dalmazia a close second.

Africa? I am not so sure either. The Lybian war ended just a couple of years earlier, and effectively 55,000 men are still there suppressing guerrillas.
Maybe if there were a possibility to get a real settler colony, but there nothing like that on the market. :D

IMHO you re talking of the Fascist targets, which will come in a generation, not of the 2nd decade of 20th century.
There are also significant numbers in favor of neutrality (socialists and catholics in first place).
My gut feeling is that Trentino, Istria and a reasonable arrangement for Trieste in exchange for friendly neutrality would have been a deal. Pity that Austrians were too boneheaded and full of themselves to make a deal, even if Germany pushed them more than once.
 
Anti Austrian sentiment was sky high and the Allies would later offer much much more then that, and a chance the get back at the hated enemy. The Italians would ask what the Allies had to offer, get a similar proposal to OTL, and join the Allies.

I disagree. The interventist party was relatevly small, the majority of the people was for neutrality. The decision to enter war was made by the King and enforced over the goverment after London secret agreement with the Entente and after similar contacts with the Central Powers had failed.

That might be possible, but I dont think that Italian pride could stand for it. Remember, they also wanted Savoy, Nice, Dalamatia, and lots of territory in Africa.

Actually, the central powers, if they accepted the italian claims, were in the position to offer much more to Italy than the entente. Basically an awful lot of french colonies in Africa.

Timing is important, though. Italy could not enter war against Britain, since the british could easily strangle italian commerce with a blockade. So this agreement with Austria must be made before Germany invades through Belgium, triggering the british DOW. Besides, if Italy manages to attract enough french troops on her border, Germany could actually win the run to Paris in TTL, leading to a possible CP victory.

As for giving Trentino and Friuli up in exchange for italian neutrality, it seems to me quite improbable. Austria should have feared italians much more they did OTL. Anyway, Istria and Trieste would have never been part of such agreement, since Trieste was the last good port left to Austria.
 
If I recall correctly, South Tyrol has a high degree of autonomy in Italy. Could it vote to return itself to Austria?
 
Post WW2?
Austria gets seen as Germany's first victim (as it so often is) and Italy doesn't quite get off so free as OTL for some reason. Tyrol is returned to Austria as a matter of common course in the post-war border rearranging.
 
Post WW2?
Austria gets seen as Germany's first victim (as it so often is) and Italy doesn't quite get off so free as OTL for some reason. Tyrol is returned to Austria as a matter of common course in the post-war border rearranging.

Austria a victim of Germany? Quite curious: the argument usually goes that Austria wanted to become a part of Germany

Italy got off scot free?
Zara, Fiume, Istria, eastern Friuli, all the colonies, Trieste as a UN mandate - if this was scot-free...
 
Actually if the chief of staff of the Italian army had remained the same then there was a strong possibility that Italy might have stayed with the Central Poweres. This is accordinf to the recent book The White War, which is about the war between Italy and Austria-Hungary.
 
Actually if the chief of staff of the Italian army had remained the same then there was a strong possibility that Italy might have stayed with the Central Poweres. This is accordinf to the recent book The White War, which is about the war between Italy and Austria-Hungary.

You mean gen Pollio, who died on 1st July 1914 and was known for his tripartite sympathies.
I still believe it is quite difficult, given that A-H was completely deaf on the idea of territorial compensations to Italy.
In any case the decsion to enter the war and on which side was up to the government ( Salandra and Sonnino in particular).
 
Savoy and Nice were not exactly the hottest topic in 1914-15.
Trento and Trieste were at the top of the list, with Istria and Dalmazia a close second.

Africa? I am not so sure either. The Lybian war ended just a couple of years earlier, and effectively 55,000 men are still there suppressing guerrillas.
Maybe if there were a possibility to get a real settler colony, but there nothing like that on the market. :D

IMHO you re talking of the Fascist targets, which will come in a generation, not of the 2nd decade of 20th century.
There are also significant numbers in favor of neutrality (socialists and catholics in first place).

Of course, it wasn't the main concern to get Savoy and Nice back, but still an irredentist aim. As was the concept (not a bad one, as it would later be proved correct) that Libya was a settler colony. Also I read somewhere that Eritrea was suitable for White settlement too.

My gut feeling is that Trentino, Istria and a reasonable arrangement for Trieste in exchange for friendly neutrality would have been a deal. Pity that Austrians were too boneheaded and full of themselves to make a deal, even if Germany pushed them more than once.

I dont know how AH would accept keeping Trieste as an exclave, but apart from that it might be sensible. Trieste would eventually need to rejoin the Patria, though.

Actually, the central powers, if they accepted the italian claims, were in the position to offer much more to Italy than the entente. Basically an awful lot of french colonies in Africa.

Im sure Savoy, Nice and Corsica woulf be thrown into the deal too. But, as I said, the Italians saw Austria as the literal 'evil oppressing empire' which for a few hundred years they were. They would not fight on the same side. The victory speech over the Austrians in WWI is actually printed in every single Italian barracks, for example.

Timing is important, though. Italy could not enter war against Britain, since the british could easily strangle italian commerce with a blockade. So this agreement with Austria must be made before Germany invades through Belgium, triggering the british DOW. Besides, if Italy manages to attract enough french troops on her border, Germany could actually win the run to Paris in TTL, leading to a possible CP victory.

This, though it wont be a 'world war', could work. There will have to be a war against austria eventually, though. There just has to! For pride, revenge, and of course territory.

I hope this makes everything more clear. Anyway, this discussion is supposed to be about post war Austria, not Italy :)...
 
Of course, it wasn't the main concern to get Savoy and Nice back, but still an irredentist aim. As was the concept (not a bad one, as it would later be proved correct) that Libya was a settler colony. Also I read somewhere that Eritrea was suitable for White settlement too.



I dont know how AH would accept keeping Trieste as an exclave, but apart from that it might be sensible. Trieste would eventually need to rejoin the Patria, though.





This, though it wont be a 'world war', could work. There will have to be a war against austria eventually, though. There just has to! For pride, revenge, and of course territory.

I hope this makes everything more clear. Anyway, this discussion is supposed to be about post war Austria, not Italy :)...

True; but the best way to keep Bozen in Austrian hands is to find an accomodation in 1914 - which A-H was very unwilling to consider
 
Well, the easiest way I could think of is an agreement between Austria and Italy in 1914. Basically austrians accept italian claims on Trentino and Friuli (probably minus Trieste, or giving Trieste a special status) in exchange for italian entry in war on Central powers side. This division could follow the language border rather than the geographical one. Indipendently by the the war outcome, Austria would probably retain South Tyrol.

However if Trentino and Istria where offered for neutrality, I belive that Italy will remain out of the war, happly profiting of both sides need of industrial supplies.
I Agree,
and this was the best solution.:rolleyes:
 
Austria a victim of Germany? Quite curious: the argument usually goes that Austria wanted to become a part of Germany
Not really.
Its far more seen as a victim.
As the old saying says; Austria's greatest achievement is convincing the world Beethoven was a Austrian and Hitler was a German.

Italy got off scot free?
Zara, Fiume, Istria, eastern Friuli, all the colonies, Trieste as a UN mandate - if this was scot-free...

Oh yeah, forgot about Yugoslavia.
Thats not too significant a loss though compared to Germany.
 
Last edited:
This, though it wont be a 'world war', could work. There will have to be a war against austria eventually, though. There just has to! For pride, revenge, and of course territory.

I hope this makes everything more clear. Anyway, this discussion is supposed to be about post war Austria, not Italy :)...

Well, this is completely true, but it's hard talking about South Tyrol without involving Italy at some point :D.

Actually I think that 1914 is the latest year the OP request could be achieved. At any point later Italy would demand the geographical border. The concessions in exchange for mere neutrality are quite improbable, anyway. Austria could have given uo those territories for an alliance, not for neutrality.
As for a war with Austria after WW1, it depends a lot by the actual outcome of the war and the relative strenght of the others european nations. But once most of the land claims are fulfilled, I think that relations between the two nations would have stabilized.

You could consider, otherwise, a more succeful 1866 war. OTL the italian army fared quite poorly, but with a better command they could have beated A-H in a decisive manner, leading us to the desired borders. But in this case, a clash with Austria during WW1 would have been inevitable.

Not really.
Its far more seen as a victim.
As the old saying says; Austria's greatest achievement is convincing the world Beethoven was a Austrian and Hitler was a German.

No one can say that austrians are not smart :D. Anyway the allies could have done far more to Italy, true, but it would have been against their interest. They needed the support of the old establishment to keep control of the country and prevent a communist take over and the price was keeping most of the homeland.

If I recall correctly, South Tyrol has a high degree of autonomy in Italy. Could it vote to return itself to Austria?

Trentino Alto adige has an high degree of autonomy especially on fiscal matter, IIRC. Privileges that I'm afraid they wouldn't have if they become part of Austria. And this is the main reason why they will remain italians.
Anyway, even if they managed to obtain a referendum on the matter and got an overwhelming success, I doubt they would allowed to go away. I don't think that italian constitution has a law about secession... They could make one on the spot, though :rolleyes:.
IIRC, during the seventies there was a terrorist group that "fought" for the secession of South Tyrol, but they were really a minor group that never achieved anything.
 
Austria a victim of Germany? Quite curious: the argument usually goes that Austria wanted to become a part of Germany

Italy got off scot free?
Zara, Fiume, Istria, eastern Friuli, all the colonies, Trieste as a UN mandate - if this was scot-free...

Most of this the Italians lost by 1943. Not to mention most of it wasnt even Italian to begin with.
 
Lega Nord

This is close to ASB, but there is a not-to-small right-wing-secessionist party in Italy called LEGA NORD which gained some momentum in the 1990s. They promote the secession of what they call PADANIA, the whole North of Italy.

In the wake of such - maybe tumultous - a break-up, Südtirol could just sneak back into Austria.
 
Top