Neutral Italy in WWII - what would happen to its colonies

On a wider political scale, there is a strong possibility of Italy looking to establish a Mediterranean pact (which might include France too, besides the usual suspects: ITTL France and Italy would have had friendly relations during WW2 - the more so if Italy becomes a co-belligerent in late 1943 or 1944 - as well as share common interests in the stability of Mediterranean). There might even be a common nuclear program in the cards.

Ooh! Could we perhaps see some co-operation between France/Italy in security operations in their North African colonies, a-la Portugal/Rhodesia/South Africa? Libya and Algeria's placement on the map would mean that cross-border operations, and shared intel, could allow both countries to cling on to their African provinces slightly longer ITTL.

I wonder what Greece's role would be in this, post-war. Would there still be Communist coup attempts there? Perhaps we might see Italy engage in peacekeeping operations in Greece and Yugoslavia, as a veil for asserting political and trade control over the Eastern Med. Without the fall of Fascism, but with growing Italian capitalism, and the general move away from overt imperialism, perhaps the Mare Nostrum doctrine would evolve, to better suit the modern day.
 
Ooh! Could we perhaps see some co-operation between France/Italy in security operations in their North African colonies, a-la Portugal/Rhodesia/South Africa? Libya and Algeria's placement on the map would mean that cross-border operations, and shared intel, could allow both countries to cling on to their African provinces slightly longer ITTL.

I wonder what Greece's role would be in this, post-war. Would there still be Communist coup attempts there? Perhaps we might see Italy engage in peacekeeping operations in Greece and Yugoslavia, as a veil for asserting political and trade control over the Eastern Med. Without the fall of Fascism, but with growing Italian capitalism, and the general move away from overt imperialism, perhaps the Mare Nostrum doctrine would evolve, to better suit the modern day.
I suppose that developments in Greece will depend on what happens in the Balkans, but without the Axis occupation there should be no chance for a communist partisan movement to develop. Yugoslavia should be in a similar situation, leaving aside the likelihood that it survives the war without being balkanised. Bulgaria is quite likely to stay out of the war for good too (and maybe take a bite of Macedonia if Yugoslavia is partitioned). Romania (and most likely Hungary) are likely to be in the war on the German side, and in such a case they would be overrun by Russia at the end. Czechia might end up finlandised (with Slovakia a member of the TTL Warsaw pact), but it's not a given: it really depends how the last months of the war play out. If Italy is a co-belligerent, there is a good chance that both Austria and Czechia would not be under Russia.
 
Does the PoD go far enough back that Fermi feels safe for his Wife in Italy without the new Racial Laws that the Moose put in just before the Pact of Steel, or leaves as OTL in late 1938?

Fermi isnt needed. Italy is rich enough and advanced enough and most importantly independantly acting. They're a bit like France, when they see that all the cool guys are making nukes they'll go "me too!" and pay up and by 1955 or at the very least 1960 they should have it.
 
I don't believe that Italy would take in Jewish refugees, settling them in the colonies. As mentioned earlier, they wanted the colonies to be Italian. Italy might allow Jewish refugees to transit through Italy to the United States, Argentina and other safe countries however. Considering that a neutral Italy would retain strong shipping links with the Americas, this the most obvious destination. Until 1942, German policy towards the Jews was a bit unclear, as the German government in some areas preferred to more or less ransom Jews in return for their escape. Their ability to leave was predicated on the payment of goods in terms of raw materials or funds from aid agencies (particularly from the U.S.). Often it also rested on the ability of sympathetic consular officials of neutral countries granting transit visas. With Italy sharing borders with the reich does provide some ability for there to be an organised escape for Jews from France, Germany etc.

Additionally, if there is no Balkan theatre, meaning Greece, Bulgaria and possibly Yugoslavia remain out of the fray, the Jews in those countries inevitably fare better. The problem is that the bulk of the European Jewry lives in the former Pale of Settlement, hence around half of the deaths attributable to the Shoah having been in Poland, and almost one-fourth being the Ukraine, Belarus and Baltic States (particularly Lithuania). These Jews would be inevitably harder to assist, but even a slightly larger number surviving could have been possible. Additionally, a neutral Bulgaria and Greece could allow Hungarian and Romanian to make their way by ship to Palestine, particularly from Greek ports.

Another issue is Palestine. Up until 1935, Mussolini had supported Zionism, but afterwards he tried to support Arab nationalism, mostly as a way to weaken Britain's position there. If even 100,000 Jews arrive during the war, this could allow Israel to take over more land at its inception. This could alter the dynamics of the Arab-Israeli conflict(s) completely.
 
Fermi isnt needed. Italy is rich enough and advanced enough and most importantly independantly acting. They're a bit like France, when they see that all the cool guys are making nukes they'll go "me too!" and pay up and by 1955 or at the very least 1960 they should have it.
My wild assed guess, based on how the Italian economy performed post-1945, is that they'd be about 5 years behind the French. Would that make it 1965 or so? However, I wonder if the delivery system would be a problem. Unless they bought V-bombers from the UK or the Mirage IV from France.

Still, perhaps an Italy not devastated by war could have kept its own aircraft industry technologically competitive and designed its own long-range bomber or IRBM.
 
Fermi isnt needed. Italy is rich enough and advanced enough and most importantly independantly acting. They're a bit like France, when they see that all the cool guys are making nukes they'll go "me too!" and pay up and by 1955 or at the very least 1960 they should have it.
In order to avoid the Racial Laws and the Steel Pact the POD must be earlier than what was indicated in the OP (June 1940): the most logical choice would be the British not reneging on the Laval proposal for Ethiopia, and the Stresa Front staying alive. Obviously this will result in huge butterflies.

The nuclear program would not need Fermi remaining in Italy: it's just a matter of knowing it can be done and having enough money and industrial support to build an atom bomb. I disagree however on the assumption that it would be just a matter of prestige: in the 1950s it made quite a difference to have or not a nuclear capacity, and this in terms of realpolitik.

Does Italy press its claims in Dalmatia, maybe even under the guise of anti-communism?

As I posted earlier, I would be surprised if Yugoslavia survived intact TTL WW2. My best guess is either a civil war and/or an intervention by Italy and Bulgaria. In such a scenario, I would assume Croatia and Slovenia get their independence (most likely under Italian influence), Bulgaria gets most of Macedonia and Italy would get Dalmazia for her troubles (plus maybe Kossovo, on the basis of the Albanian population there). What happens of Bosnia is more problematic: it would make sense to split it along ethnic lines between Croatia and Serbia. Serbia is the obvious looser here, and there might a Communist insurgency as well: the equivalent of the Greek civil war IOTL, with Italy supporting the Cetniks and Stalin the Reds.
 

Deleted member 1487

My wild assed guess, based on how the Italian economy performed post-1945, is that they'd be about 5 years behind the French.
I'd actually argue if they stayed out of WW2 and France was conquered as per OTL Italy could well be in advance of France with Libyan oil, no WW2 damaged/losses, and profiting off of the war and as a refuge for German money/scientists/experts fleeing the Fatherland. Of course that is if butterflies don't result in the USSR collapsing and Germany effectively winning the war.
 
My wild assed guess, based on how the Italian economy performed post-1945, is that they'd be about 5 years behind the French. Would that make it 1965 or so? However, I wonder if the delivery system would be a problem. Unless they bought V-bombers from the UK or the Mirage IV from France.

Still, perhaps an Italy not devastated by war could have kept its own aircraft industry technologically competitive and designed its own long-range bomber or IRBM.
Which would incentivate the Italian interest in mounting her own operation Paperclip.
I would anyway disagree on Italy being slower than France to set up her own nuclear project: Italian position would be better since it can be assumed that northern Italy was not a war theatre (with the possible exception of some bombing in the late phase of the war) and her financial position should be stronger than France. Anyway I am still convinced that Italy and France would be smarter to set up a joint nuclear project
 
Where might Italy test a nuclear weapon? Deserts of Libya rather than anywhere in the Horn of Africa I suspect...
 
Still, perhaps an Italy not devastated by war could have kept its own aircraft industry technologically competitive and designed its own long-range bomber

The Piaggio P.108 was competitive with the B-17.
Their designs were fine, but they were limited by engine design
 
My wild assed guess, based on how the Italian economy performed post-1945, is that they'd be about 5 years behind the French. Would that make it 1965 or so? However, I wonder if the delivery system would be a problem. Unless they bought V-bombers from the UK or the Mirage IV from France.

Still, perhaps an Italy not devastated by war could have kept its own aircraft industry technologically competitive and designed its own long-range bomber or IRBM.

That places them behind the Chinese. The country where roaming gangs of overzealous party members and students killed people in broad daylight for even looking like they might be an intellectual. Italy is better than that.
 
What do you all think would happen between the Ethiopian Church and Catholic Church. Ethiopia was historically Christian, thus one of the reasons why it blended so well with the West and was able to survive so long. However, under Italian dominance, it would not be too hard for the Italians to install a puppet Patriarch who swore into the Catholic church, though a lot of people would object to that, seeming a lil too 1500's for most people. Could an Italian backed Catholic organization be able to deal with an irate Coptic population? Could this also even lead to an earlier Autocephaly for the "loyal" Eritrean Tewahedo Church?
 
On the War profile with Italy neutral, I think a big unexplored topic is what happens to Vichy France.
Fascist Italy was arguably the top reason Vichy France eventually fell - they undertook very serious attempts at reclaiming parts of France they felt were Italian (you can read a very good article on it here) and used their status as the European second-in-command of the Axis to prevent her rising again to challenge it; for example, successfully preventing her from strongly reinforcing Syria. This eventually lead to the Allies switching to Free France recognization later into the war, and especially to the execution of the Case Anton occupation; if Italy went neutral, however then Vichy France would be friendly to Germany, but very ready at taking revenge as soon as possible; maybe just with more problems with the UK like the Mers-el-Kebir attack or the less-known Syria-Lebanon campaign.
As for Italy's prospects on post-war economics, they might be slightly less good than others think; the postwar boom won't be funded as generously here (if it's funded at all), plus the Fascists will dump a lot of money into making sure they have a respectable Army (or what they believe to be respectable) instead of relying on NATO providing a huge part of their security needs.
 
Top