WI Mussolini Had Libyan Oil In the 1930s?

One effect that hasn't been mentioned is that a better Italian army, would likely not need German support in the Balkans.

Would it necessarily be better? If you're funding the development of an oil industry, you have less money for armaments, no?
 
Even if the production fields are in operation, it is unlikely that refineries would be on the African side of the Med, so oil for the North African campaign still had to cross the Med at least once, and in this case twice.

Plus, the biggest logistical hurdle for the Axis was actually not shipping (see the book "Supplying War"), but the 1200 mile drive from Tripoli (the only really substantive port) to the front, and shortage of trucks. It didn't matter how much in the way of supply that shipping got to North Africa, it still had to be hauled a staggeringly long way on a coast road.

In addition, refineries in North Africa would have been very vulnerable to Allied bombing.

Oil in Libya in the late 1930s would however had markedly increased the foreign exchange reserves for Italy, which would have had a very useful bonus to their arming efforts. In addition, Italy would likely have more then sufficient oil to operate its fleet (a problem historically that sharply limited its availability) as it would have been able to build up a sizeable prewar reserve.

So its possible that in 1940-41, the Italians might have been better able to use its fleet, and have the money to have built up a better equipped army and thus possibly have a good chance to take Egypt. If that failed though, there would not have been a second chance.

Incidently, RN submarines sank the majority of the Italian tanker fleet, so if the Italians do have oil, even more efforts would have been made against such a fleet.
 
Assuming oil is found pre-war, it cannot be found before 1934 at best, but most likely 1938 as it actually happened.
If oil is found in 1934, which does not mean that production starts the day after, the discovery might truly affect the Italian history in the '30s, including the Abyssinian war. Under such scenario (best case) and giving due consideration to the difficulties in extracting oil from Syrtis fields (deep fields, possibly quite similar to Texas oil), the Italian state oil company (AGIP) will have to set up a patnership with some American company, to procure the necessary technology: Italo Balbo (who's governor of Lybia) is still quite popular in the States, following the trans-oceanic flight to Chicago, and should be able to open some door.
 
No Axis

Italy only turned to Germany, after Ethiopia, and the LoN Economic & Political isolation.
If Italy has the Oil Fields, Britain & France will be less likely to support the LoN attempts at Isolation of Italy. As Such It is Very Likely Italy remains Neutral.

At least till Mussolini takes it into his Head to attack Greece as step one in His New Empire.
 
Italy only turned to Germany, after Ethiopia, and the LoN Economic & Political isolation.
If Italy has the Oil Fields, Britain & France will be less likely to support the LoN attempts at Isolation of Italy. As Such It is Very Likely Italy remains Neutral.

True, but only if oil is discovered after the Ethiopia campaign. After that they just had to do something about the invasion, they could not simply look the other way.

What could be interesting is how Italy get the know how and the technology to exploit the deep wells in Lybia. IIRC only the USA had that technology in the 30s (I'm no expert, though).
If we imagine a stronger relantionship between Italy and USA (favoured by Balbo good prees in the States), we could have an Italy initially neutral during WW2, but allied with USA.

Naughty thought: if Mussolini declares war to Japan after Pearl Harbour, is he going to have a special place into american hearths? :D
 
I'd think oil being found in Libya guarantees that Italy dosen't go to war with the UK. Going to war with one of the world's greatest maritime powers when your greatest natural asset is over the see is beyond even Mussolini.
 
Top