Italy could easily keep Libya given its smaller population density, plus the settler population could easily overwhelm the local Libyan population given Italy’s plan of colonization.Libya is likely gone too.
Italy could easily keep Libya given its smaller population density, plus the settler population could easily overwhelm the local Libyan population given Italy’s plan of colonization.Libya is likely gone too.
Wait. I mixed you up with another person in regards to east Africa. My bad.I don't think Italy could hold onto its East Africa holdings at all. Libya is likely gone too. Italy may gain no additional colonies, but it would still be holing the Dodecanese, islands no less useless to them than any of those they might gain if Greece went Communist. Maybe Italy gives up the Dodecanese too, but that might end up depending on the fate of Greece i the alternate World War II. But, if France was not able to hold onto any part of Algeria, Italy was not going to hold onto Libya or anything else in Africa. Keeping Albania is interesting, but I'm not even sure that's going to be possible.
Probably to project themselves in the Eastern Mediterranean. It’s possible that these islands would be given back to the Greeks, but they’d probably insist on maintaining military bases there. I’m not sure the Greeks would want or allow that.Yeah I don’t think Ethiopia would be under their rule for very long and not sure about Somalia and Eritrea. Libya is probably non negotiable for them once they hit like there. I just don’t see why they’d keep minor holdings in Greece.
Libya gaining independence isn’t going to happen if Italy stays out of WW2, although they’re probably going to eventually grant full citizenship rights to the native Libyans. There’s a good chance the country ends up like Israel, although the demographics are much more favourable to the Italians in this scenario. Once they start pumping oil in Libya, they’d keep it indefinitely.There's no way for them to hold on in North Africa once the wave of Arab independence happens. Maybe they keep an enclave, or they are able to puppetize postcolonial Libya, but once independence rips through the Arab world, it'll hit Libya too, nominally at least. As or the Greek islands, they are places where Italy had interests and ambitions, and were largely ruled by Venice once upon a time.
No Farinaci? Thank God...Also in terms of succession, even though Mussolini's desired successor is Balbo, I would imagine there would be rival factions in the PNF who would attempt to succeed and would attempt to contest Balbo's position.
Hence off the top of my head I can think of who would most likely take power:
- Italo Balbo [Mussolini's Choice]
- Ciano Galeazzo
- Dino Grandi
- Achille Starace
- Ettore Muti
- Junio Valerio Borghese
- Alessandro Pavolini
Even the interior?Libya gaining independence isn’t going to happen if Italy stays out of WW2, although they’re probably going to eventually grant full citizenship rights to the native Libyans. There’s a good chance the country ends up like Israel, although the demographics are much more favourable to the Italians in this scenario. Once they start pumping oil in Libya, they’d keep it indefinitely.
I mean the man was basically a Pro-Nazi sympathizer. Plus with the Axis defeat, especially if Italy were in the allies, I can see him lose his reputation and what power he has.No Farinaci? Thank God...
Libya gaining independence isn’t going to happen if Italy stays out of WW2, although they’re probably going to eventually grant full citizenship rights to the native Libyans. There’s a good chance the country ends up like Israel, although the demographics are much more favourable to the Italians in this scenario. Once they start pumping oil in Libya, they’d keep it indefinitely.
France was a democracy and Algeria had a fairly large population. IIRC, Algeria had a population of about 10 million with 1 million being European. Libya had a population of 1 million, with 100k being European. In addition to this, Mussolini and Balbo had plans for settling 20k Italians in Libya every year and mainland Italy had a population of 45 million during WW2.I don't think Italy could hold onto its East Africa holdings at all. Libya is likely gone too. Italy may gain no additional colonies, but it would still be holing the Dodecanese, islands no less useless to them than any of those they might gain if Greece went Communist. Maybe Italy gives up the Dodecanese too, but that might end up depending on the fate of Greece i the alternate World War II. But, if France was not able to hold onto any part of Algeria, Italy was not going to hold onto Libya or anything else in Africa. Keeping Albania is interesting, but I'm not even sure that's going to be possible.
I imagine that Italians would make up the overwhelming majority in coastal cities and native Libyans would move to the interior. There would likely be a problem with terrorism, but it depends on how the Libyans are treated in the long run. I don’t think it’s feasible to keep them as second class citizens indefinitely. That’s just going to breed enmity. But the benefits of having Libyans land and resources would outweigh the downsides.Even the interior?
The French wanted a somewhat independent foreign policy and OTL they originally began working on their nuclear weapon project with West Germany and Italy. I think in this scenario, France would move closer to continental Europe as a way to assert themselves and carve out a position in the world independent of their relationship to American and Britain.On top of a significant Italian population in Libya, can also see a large portion descending from fleeing Pied-Noirs and Mutamassirun as well as other European migrants (including post-WW2 White émigrés – a large number in the case of the latter manging to avoid their fate in Operation Keelhaul / Repatriation of Cossacks after WW2 with reluctant Western Allies and others turning a blind eye here and there).
The Italians gaining and pumping out the oil in Libya also potentially mitigates if not completely butterflies away the impact of the oil crises on Europe from Suez in 1956 up to the 1979 oil crisis.
Would be fascinating to see what becomes of Albania depending on whether it is supported by Italy or under Italian Protectorate in ATL, especially if ATL Italy uses Albania as a proxy against Yugoslavia. Leading to a situation where an Italian headed Western-leaning yet Anti-Communist Bloc* is pitted against the Yugoslavia headed Non-Aligned Movement during the Cold War. At the same time can see Yugoslavia support Albanian nationalists led by the likes of Koçi Xoxe who (unlike Enver Hoxha) were for Albania being part of Yugoslavia IOTL.
Can also see ATL Italy the target of potential French duplicity with De Gaulle post-Algeria* embarking on foreign policy more favorable to the Arab world during the 1960s (despite Italian ruled Libya being a potential safe haven for Pied-Noirs, etc in ATL), it would be interesting to see whether the ATL equivalent of the Years of Lead still occurs up to analogue of the Mitterrand doctrine.
Perhaps a more Western-leaning yet Anti-Communist Bloc (or Fourth Cold War Bloc) that at various points during the Cold War is composed of Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, South Africa, Rhodesia, possibly ROC / Taiwan and a few other countries seeking an alternative to either the Western Bloc or Non-Aligned Movement?
* - It depends on whether De Gaulle still adopts a more Pro-Arab foreign policy in ATL, especially if ATL Italy plays a valuable role in mitigating the Suez Oil Crisis or even a greater role in the Suez Crisis itself in helping the British, French and Israeli's remove Nasser from power by invading Egypt from the west in Libya (drawing a little bit of inspiration from BiteNibbleChomp's Patton in Korea/MacArthur in the West House TL - at least with regards to Suez).
**- A Western-leaning yet Anti-Communist Bloc that at various points is possibly composed of Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, South Africa, Rhodesia, possibly ROC / Taiwan and a few other countries seeking an alternative to either the Western Bloc or Non-Aligned Movement.
Would the French in ATL go as far as to try co-op a potential Italian founded Bloc into its own, notwithstanding the potential disagreements between the two neigbhouring countries in this scenario?The French wanted a somewhat independent foreign policy and OTL they originally began working on their nuclear weapon project with West Germany and Italy. I think in this scenario, France would move closer to continental Europe as a way to assert themselves and carve out a position in the world independent of their relationship to American and Britain.
They could try, but OTL Italy wasn’t significantly weaker economically than France or Britain. For most of the period since WW2 ended, Italy, Britain and France generally clustered together (in that order usually). That’s without the energy resources of Libya. I don’t think it would be easy to take over from a country in the same tier as them.Would the French in ATL go as far as to try co-op a potential Italian founded Bloc into its own, notwithstanding the potential disagreements between the two neigbhouring countries in this scenario?
I either agree with everything you’ve said or think it’s possible. I’m still kinda doubtful on the whole third bloc kind of thing. I think it’s quite possible to see it as sub group of the western bloc though. Although I could see Taiwan as anything other than pro US, they can’t leave the US sphere of influence.On top of a significant Italian population in Libya, can also see a large portion descending from fleeing Pied-Noirs and Mutamassirun as well as other European migrants (including post-WW2 White émigrés – a large number in the case of the latter manging to avoid their fate in Operation Keelhaul / Repatriation of Cossacks after WW2 with reluctant Western Allies and others turning a blind eye here and there).
The Italians gaining and pumping out the oil in Libya also potentially mitigates if not completely butterflies away the impact of the oil crises on Europe from Suez in 1956 up to the 1979 oil crisis.
Would be fascinating to see what becomes of Albania depending on whether it is supported by Italy or under Italian Protectorate in ATL, especially if ATL Italy uses Albania as a proxy against Yugoslavia. Leading to a situation where an Italian headed Western-leaning yet Anti-Communist Bloc* is pitted against the Yugoslavia headed Non-Aligned Movement during the Cold War. At the same time can see Yugoslavia support Albanian nationalists led by the likes of Koçi Xoxe who (unlike Enver Hoxha) was for Albania being part of Yugoslavia IOTL.
Can also see ATL Italy the target of potential French duplicity with De Gaulle post-Algeria* embarking on foreign policy more favorable to the Arab world during the 1960s (despite Italian ruled Libya being a potential safe haven for Pied-Noirs, etc in ATL), it would be interesting to see whether the ATL equivalent of the Years of Lead still occurs up to analogue of the Mitterrand doctrine.
* - It depends on whether De Gaulle still adopts a more Pro-Arab foreign policy in ATL, especially if ATL Italy plays a valuable role in mitigating the Suez Oil Crisis or even a greater role in the Suez Crisis itself in helping the British, French and Israeli's remove Nasser from power by invading Egypt from the west in Libya (drawing a little bit of inspiration from BiteNibbleChomp's Patton in Korea/MacArthur in the West House TL - at least with regards to Suez).
**- A Western-leaning yet Anti-Communist Bloc that at various points is possibly composed of Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, South Africa, Rhodesia, possibly ROC / Taiwan and a few other countries seeking an alternative to either the Western Bloc or Non-Aligned Movement.
That’s true. Idk if France would even try to. Especially since this Italy should be much more powerful considering it wouldn’t have had the war go through it plus it would eventually have Libya’s oil.They could try, but OTL Italy wasn’t significantly weaker economically than France or Britain. For most of the period since WW2 ended, Italy, Britain and France generally clustered together (in that order usually). That’s without the energy resources of Libya. I don’t think it would be easy to take over from a country in the same tier as them.
I went over this in detail in another thread, but they almost certainly would get one if they don’t join the war on the side of the Axis.Also. If Italy joins the allies could it get a UN Security Council seat? Or would that only be if it played a big enough role? Or is it completely too far out there?
Im not sure this would happen. It took the Allies landing in Sicily to topple him in 1943. If they do liberalize, it would probably be a gradual process and a large and powerful fascist party would likely continue to exist.I'm really thinking it ends as a sort of mix between Portugal and Spain's regime collapses. Mussolini dies and then theres probably some Angola-like war in East Africa with communist guerillas. The party becomes unpopular and the king is maybe able to restore a democratic government. Italy will probably have already gotten a majority in Libya with there agressive 4th shore settlement and the Dodecanese make a nice naval base. Albania could maybe be autonomous or break away, but still it would be in Italy's sphere. At best you got the med singing Giovinezza for an extra 20 years.
I either agree with everything you’ve said or think it’s possible. I’m still kinda doubtful on the whole third bloc kind of thing. I think it’s quite possible to see it as sub group of the western bloc though. Although I could see Taiwan as anything other than pro US, they can’t leave the US sphere of influence.
Would be pretty interesting to see what the suez crisis would be like if Italy had joined. Could have some interesting ripple affects to have a third power join in.
A sort of rivalry in the western block between Italy and France sure could be interesting if their shared allies can’t get them to stop.