Triple Alliance

1882. Italy joins Germany and Austria-Hungary in forming The Triple Alliance. Historically, Italy was never a strong partner in this grouping, and when bullets began to fly in 1914, Italy asserts her neutrality, eventually joining the war against her former allies.

Suppose a few events are tweaked. A less belligerant Austria into peninsular affairs, a more reasonable Pius IX who supports Italian unification, Italian non-involvement in the Austro-Prussian War of 1866, etc., and perhaps an Italy emerges that has no harsh regard towards Austria. A possible result? The Italians remain in the Triple Alliance as a forceful member looking for colonial gain.

How does World War One change when its Triple Entente vs. Triple Alliance?
 
There is the need of two PoD

- After the annexation of Bosnia, Italy and A-H (it will need a lot of German pressure and some change in the other Triple alliance goverment but can be done) come to an understanding about compensation. Probably Italy will get Albania (not a thing that will make A-H really happy but she can survive) and some cultural rights for the italians in the A-H empire (an university in Trieste and the pledge of Vienna to protect the italian identity).
- Italy accept the Ottoman proposal to give at the italian the administrative powers in Lybia and mantain legal sovereignity. With this there is no diplomatic and military tension with the A-H (who basically acted as an Ottoman ally during the Italian-Turkish war) and Italy don't waste resources so can partecipate in the conflict by day one.
Bonus if FF keep is hatred for Italy and the desire to see the italian penisula go back at the pre-unity days for himself.
With this Vienna and Rome will not start frenchkissing or even become BFF but at least relantions will be not so strained that everybody knows that the alliance will not be renewed
 

BlondieBC

Banned
World War I is butterflied away as we know it. There will be wars, it might be a world war, but it will be a totally different war. You are asking two, largely unrelated questions.

What happens if Italy joins the central powers IOTL?

Answer: It is one of the few quick CP win scenarios. While Italy will not be terribly effective invading France, the 300,000 French troops used to fight them will be sorely missed, and the Germans penetrate much, much deeper into France in 1914. The combined Italian/A-H fleet will be capable of a challenge to the French Fleet alone, so RN resources will have to be used for it. No Gallipoli, Ottomans do a lot better. Likely, Entente can't use Eastern Med for merchant shipping, which has about the same impact as the Suez Canal being closed.

What happens if there is a lasting Triple Alliance between Italy, Germany, and A-H?

History looks nothing like OTL, a few years after the POD. We can't assume the Balkan wars happen like OTL, the Germany/UK Naval race, etc. We can't assume the map of Africa looks the same. I am seeing pictures of the Ethiopia to Douala railroad.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
It is one of the few quick CP win scenarios. While Italy will not be terribly effective invading France, the 300,000 French troops used to fight them will be sorely missed, and the Germans penetrate much, much deeper into France in 1914. The combined Italian/A-H fleet will be capable of a challenge to the French Fleet alone, so RN resources will have to be used for it. No Gallipoli, Ottomans do a lot better. Likely, Entente can't use Eastern Med for merchant shipping, which has about the same impact as the Suez Canal being closed.

Not only that, but the hundreds of thousands of Austro-Hungarian troops deployed against Italy IOTL could be deployed against Russia ITTL.
 
No Gallipoli only means the Entente avoids that extremely costly fiasco which is to their advantage.

As for Italy once the RN destroys Italy's coastal trade which is effectively the Italian economy south of Rome...
 
It doesn't change all that much, as the addition of Italy to the CP means *they* are the ones continuously nervous that a major disaster will see the French able to strike at Germany and Austria-Hungary from the rear.
 
Austro-Prussian war.

If Italy is not involved in the Austro-Prussian war of 1866 then -
a) Bismarck may not fight the Austrians -
b) if the war goes ahead Austria may well win.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
Not only that, but the hundreds of thousands of Austro-Hungarian troops deployed against Italy IOTL could be deployed against Russia ITTL.

True, but I left this out because the war might be over, and would be won before the impact of this begins to be felt in May 1915. Remove a French Army from the German front, the Germans probably hold at least the Marne line and have a sporting chance of taking Calais. A lot will depend on how well things go in France. If France is driven to the peace table by the end of 1914, then it is a quick war. If France makes it to about May 1915, then Germany will still need to turn east, so it will be the decisive campaign of 1916 that ends the war.

No Gallipoli only means the Entente avoids that extremely costly fiasco which is to their advantage.

As for Italy once the RN destroys Italy's coastal trade which is effectively the Italian economy south of Rome...


Yes OTL, Gallipoli was a mistake by the UK. If I was writing a TL to have the Entente do a lot better, cancelling Gallipoli is very high on the list of POD. IMO, if the Gallipoli forces are used in France, the UK might actually break the German lines, and at a minimum, they forces Germany to abort its attack on Russia 1-2 months earlier. This is partially offset by the Ottomans doing better, which will not be felt in 1915 to any large degree.

However, in a war with Italy on Central Powers side, it will not work out so nice for the UK. By late 1915, the Gallipoli forces will be merely replacing French units tied down fighting the Italians, and likely the war is over in early 1915 in a negotiated peace. However, if it goes on longer, the Ottomans become a real issue for the Entente. With only minor Italian/A-H forces in the Black Sea, the Ottomans will be able to conduct landings against Russia exposed coast line. For Example, the Ottomans attempting to retake the Crimea combine with a stronger than OTL attack by the Germans into Russia might well collapse Russia. If the Eastern Med can be contested, then Cyprus and the Suez come into play. If the blockade is loser and more railroad material becomes available, the Suez and Basra come into play. Even if none of this happens, the Red Sea will come into play. The Ottomans need just one short Spur to make the Red Sea a major naval battleground area.

Yes, if the RN deploys heavily to the Med, it can make life very difficult on Italy. Italy has a huge coal issue. Libya will be a problem for them But I am not sure the RN moves many more ships to the Med than OTL due to the existence of the High Seas Fleet, and with OTL deployment, who wins control of the Med is not certain. To a large extent; the French, A-H, and Italian Navies are untested in major surface actions. Many items that we know about the RN from Jutland are still unknown for these Navies. For example without Jutland, few if any would know how bad the BC ammo handling policies were, and few would understand how bad the UK's newer ammo was.

From the Naval perspective, it would be a great TL to read, but without sticking it in the ASB section, the land battles would move so fast, the naval war would not have time to develop.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
It doesn't change all that much, as the addition of Italy to the CP means *they* are the ones continuously nervous that a major disaster will see the French able to strike at Germany and Austria-Hungary from the rear.

You are massively incorrect. The Austrians had to fight the Italians anyway, so an absolute worst case scenario bordering on ASB is OTL in the Eastern Alps. It changes everything. First, France loses 300,000 troops used to stop the Germans. The Germans will get all the benefits of destroying an entire French armies without having to actually win the battle. Second, there will be major naval battles in the Med. Third, the blockade will be loser. Fourth, Italians-Americans will make it harder for the USA to enter the war.

The details can vary, but Italy entering on the CP side on day one, means a CP win. Not a cold peace, but a win.
 
By the middle of WWI the French fleet had suffiicent strength to take either the Italian or AH fleet and could have challenged both so it won't take that many British dreadnaughts to tip the balance in favor of the Entente.

The Ottoman fleet won't be a factor, especially if two certain German ships go to Italy or Austria-Hungary instead.




Incidentally the Entente OTL found the Italians to be extremely...dubious when it came to naval cooperation and Italy liked AH even less, not to mention that the only useful coordination would be the AH fleet leaving the Adriatic to help protect the Italian coast south of Rome.
 
If Italy is not involved in the Austro-Prussian war of 1866 then -
a) Bismarck may not fight the Austrians -
b) if the war goes ahead Austria may well win.

This. If most of Albrecht's army deploys to the north instead of Italy, leaving say an observation corps, the Prussians are outnumbered in all arms, and badly outclassed in Artillery and Cavalry.

Bismark is not a reckless gambler. Without an Italian involvement there may well be no Austro-Prussian war, at least not as we know it.
 

BlondieBC

Banned
By the middle of WWI the French fleet had suffiicent strength to take either the Italian or AH fleet and could have challenged both so it won't take that many British dreadnaughts to tip the balance in favor of the Entente.

The Ottoman fleet won't be a factor, especially if two certain German ships go to Italy or Austria-Hungary instead.


Incidentally the Entente OTL found the Italians to be extremely...dubious when it came to naval cooperation and Italy liked AH even less, not to mention that the only useful coordination would be the AH fleet leaving the Adriatic to help protect the Italian coast south of Rome.

It will not get to the middle of the war of OTL, the Entente will need quick and decisive wins, so I will look at 1/1/1915 ships.

French - 7 Dreads.
Italy - 6 Dreads
A-H - 4 Dreads.

The UK like to have a 2 to 1 advantage, but lets say they want 1.5 to 1 for the decisive battle. The UK would need to move 8 dreadnoughts to the fight, which is possible, but seems a bit high for the UK comfort zone. Then the UK has to find away to force the battle. A fleet in being that prevents merchant ships from using the Central Med is a CP win.

It is not a guarantee win for either side. IOTL, the UK always had more than enough capital ships. In this scenario, it will begin to have to make choices on capital ship deployments. The RN is aggressive, so it might force the battle, the question then becomes how does the 1914 Jutland type battle go with the Grand Fleet short 8 dreadnoughts?
 
.

As for Italy once the RN destroys Italy's coastal trade which is effectively the Italian economy south of Rome...
As they had done in WW2? Please at least say that without British coal the economy of Italy will be severely damaged...because i found the concept that the RN can do what she wants to Italy without repercussion amusing.
And by the way the economy south of Rome don't really count by that much.
Regarding the land warfare, the italian/french border will be a replay of the OTL Italian front as the terrain is really really difficult (to use an euphemis), but even in this case the Entente must spend men and supply for that and between the shell crisis and this new front things seem ugly, plus the original plan was to send italian troops to help the Germans in North France.
 
Last edited:
Top