No North-African front

When the Italian 5th and 10th Armies are gutted after Operation Compass, Hitler decides Africa isn't worth the hassle, and no German troops will be sent to Italian North Africa. Libya falls not long thereafter.

What happens now? Hitler IOTL sent the DAK to keep Italy in the war. So, how reluctant an ally is Italy after the loss of all its African possessions. Could Mussolini save face with Italian gains in Yugoslavia and (later on) in Greece?

Maybe he'll push for an invasion of Malta?

Does Germany need to start garrisoning Italy?

What is the effect of the addition of OTL Afrika Korps troops to the eastern front? Could these troops make a difference in the 1941 drive on Moscow (doubtful IMO), or the 1942 offensive in the Caucasus (somewhat more likely)?

What do the British do with the extra troops at their disposal? Start planning for an earlier invasion of Italy or France when the US joins in? Do the Pacific garrisons get reinforcements?

Lots of question, I know. :D
 
Last edited:

bard32

Banned
When the Italian 5th and 10th Armies are gutted after Operation Compass, Hitler decides Africa isn't worth the hassle, and no German troops will be sent to Italian North Africa. Libya falls not long thereafter.

What happens now? Hitler IOTL sent the DAK to keep Italy in the war. So, how reluctant an ally is Italy after the loss of all its African possessions. Could Mussolini save face with Italian gains in Yugoslavia and (later on) in Greece?

Maybe he'll push for an invasion of Malta?

Does Germany need to start garrisoning Italy?

What is the effect of the addition of OTL Afrika Korps troops to the eastern front? Could these troops make a difference in the 1941 drive on Moscow (doubtful IMO), or the 1942 offensive in the Caucasus (somewhat more likely)?

What do the British do with the extra troops at their disposal? Start planning for an earlier invasion of Italy or France when the US joins in? Do the Pacific garrisons get reinforcements?

Lots of question, I know. :D

Where would the United States get its experience if not for North Africa? Dieppe? I don't think so.
 
Where would the United States get its experience if not for North Africa? Dieppe? I don't think so.
Not really the main point of the thread, but still worth a reply. The US (and the British) could get experience in other fronts, like an invasion of Italy.

Anyhow, BUMP.
 
I think Mussolini's position would be weakened but not fatally undermined yet. OTL, he lost badly in Cyrenaica and in Greece but his grip on Italy didn't falter.

England would not be in a position to seriously threaten Italy due to insufficient troops and shipping to sustain an invasion.

Their most likely action would be to reinforce Greece in early 1941 or go after Vichy French colonies.

Meanwhile, the availability of the DAK could have a major impact on Barbarossa. Not so much the presence of 2 additional panzer divisions but rather the transport assets. From memory, Rommel had a significant percentage of Germany's transport assets assigned to his DAK. Considering the many times the Germans had to pause to await supplies, thousands of additional trucks could have made quite a difference in 1941.
 
I think Mussolini's position would be weakened but not fatally undermined yet. OTL, he lost badly in Cyrenaica and in Greece but his grip on Italy didn't falter.
Still, Italy's disasters in both Greece and Cyrenaica were reversed as soon as the Germans got in on it.
Mussolini could claim that although there were initial setbacks, he did beat Greece, and he drove the British out of Libya and invaded Egypt.

Here he lost Libya, and the war in Greece is going terrible.

England would not be in a position to seriously threaten Italy due to insufficient troops and shipping to sustain an invasion.
Maybe not Italy itself, but how about Sardinia for example? And when the Americans get in on it in late '41, I guess an earlier invasion of Italy could happen.

Their most likely action would be to reinforce Greece in early 1941 or go after Vichy French colonies.
They most likely would reinforce Greece a lot more than IOTL, but they would almost certainly get their asses kicked by the Germans? Maybe a larger Greek disaster than IOTL?

Meanwhile, the availability of the DAK could have a major impact on Barbarossa. Not so much the presence of 2 additional panzer divisions but rather the transport assets. From memory, Rommel had a significant percentage of Germany's transport assets assigned to his DAK. Considering the many times the Germans had to pause to await supplies, thousands of additional trucks could have made quite a difference in 1941.
Then again, if Hitler makes the same decision as IOTL, Army Group Centre will probably still be diverted south to help Army Group South, and the drive on Moscow could still falter.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
With North Africa secure, there is little need to go after Malta, especially given German's complete lack of amphibious ability.

If the british are in complete control of North Africa, and perhaps even Greece, the whole Italian campaign will become less attractive to Churchill. Perhaps the Allies settle for taking Sicily and perhaps Sardinia, once the Americans get into the war.

Italy wasn't a crucial event, although invading and taking the southern part of the country could still be worthwhile, even if all it does is lock up a number of German formations. The key is to stop when you reach the more difficult terrain, make the Germans defend against the Allies (this will cost some casualties, since you will have to run local offensives, but not like those suffered IOTL), bleed them, bomb the hell out of them and keep the Heer units tied down.

The Germans will have significantly more troops available for the Eastern Front, this could have huge impacts on how the war progresses, especially in the critical 1940-41 years.
 
Italy wasn't a crucial event, although invading and taking the southern part of the country could still be worthwhile, even if all it does is lock up a number of German formations. The key is to stop when you reach the more difficult terrain, make the Germans defend against the Allies (this will cost some casualties, since you will have to run local offensives, but not like those suffered IOTL), bleed them, bomb the hell out of them and keep the Heer units tied down.

Bit like in John Grigg's '1943, the victory that never was'?
 
With North Africa secure, there is little need to go after Malta, especially given German's complete lack of amphibious ability.
There is little military need to go after Malta, but Mussolini has got all these troops, and not a damn thing to do with them save unprestiguous anti-partisan operations in Yugoslavia and (later on) Greece.
I could see him pushing for an invasion of Malta.

If the british are in complete control of North Africa, and perhaps even Greece, the whole Italian campaign will become less attractive to Churchill. Perhaps the Allies settle for taking Sicily and perhaps Sardinia, once the Americans get into the war.
Maybe the British desire to knock Italy out of the war will be even stronger than IOTL. After all, Italian morale is wavering after the loss of all African possessions and the humiliating defeats in Greece.
Then again, an invasion of Italy proper is probably not in the cards. Sardinia could work, but I doubt if invading Sicily would be worth it. It's a lot easier for the axis to reinforce the Sicilian garrisons than it is the Sardinian.


Italy wasn't a crucial event, although invading and taking the southern part of the country could still be worthwhile, even if all it does is lock up a number of German formations. The key is to stop when you reach the more difficult terrain, make the Germans defend against the Allies (this will cost some casualties, since you will have to run local offensives, but not like those suffered IOTL), bleed them, bomb the hell out of them and keep the Heer units tied down.
Do the British have enough troops to take Southern Italy, and hold it against Italian and German counter-attacks?

The Germans will have significantly more troops available for the Eastern Front, this could have huge impacts on how the war progresses, especially in the critical 1940-41 years.
Exactly. Though it would be difficult to ascertain exactly how much of a difference, I would love to hear your take on it.
Do they have a chance to take (or encircle) Moscow in 1941, or maybe a succesful Fall Blau?
 
Top