WI: No Italy in WWII

A PoD could be avoiding the incredibly stupid action of invading Abyssinia, leading to the, less stupid but stupid nevertheless, decision to have Britain cease coal exports to Italy. Relations between Italy and the Allies would be much warmer as a result. Of course, that changes a whole lot of other things as well.
 
Churcill will be compelled to do something against the Nazi, so without the mentioned theatre we can get more raid like Dieppe or some other hastily planned attack.
Perhaps Norway???
With more Allied presence in the North Sea, northern Norway in Allied hands, could it be that the Americans disembark in Murmansk and start fighting against the Germans in the Eastern front? Crazy, I know, but without N. Africa or Italy or Greece to attack, I stll don't see a cross-channel invasion in 1943, so something useful has to be done with all these Allied resources in 1943.
 
Impact on the Holocaust

I am wondering if Italy being neutral would have any effect on the Holocaust? I am wondering if the United States would quietly encourage Italy to let Jews flee there in exchange for favorable trade terms. An alternative is that Italy would let them in with the understanding that the Jews in other countries would pay for their needs. These Jewish refugees would be a source of hard currency for Italy and key government officials.

I like to think that they would do it out of the goodness of their hearts but it seems that in many countries including my own, political votes, favorable trade terms, gold, and hard currencies are better motivators.

Stubear1012
 
I think they might have been invaded from the north by germany in trying to get Italy to join. However, the North Africa invasions might not have happened, and if the Allies or Axis tried to invade North Africa (which they wouldn't) they might join the war in order to protect their colonies. However, I think everything would have played out the same because usually, unless we are talking Hetalia, it seems that we forget that Italy was part of the war; we usually on focus on Germany and the extermination of the Jews, and the Japanese bombing Pearl Harbor. With Italy, they are usually left in the dark due to the fact it seems that they didn't do much besides re-enforcements and invasion of North Africa.
 
I am wondering if Italy being neutral would have any effect on the Holocaust? I am wondering if the United States would quietly encourage Italy to let Jews flee there in exchange for favorable trade terms. An alternative is that Italy would let them in with the understanding that the Jews in other countries would pay for their needs. These Jewish refugees would be a source of hard currency for Italy and key government officials.

I like to think that they would do it out of the goodness of their hearts but it seems that in many countries including my own, political votes, favorable trade terms, gold, and hard currencies are better motivators.

Stubear1012

Ironically without Italy in the Axis the fate of the jew in the rest of Europe will be worse; till the 43 armistice despite the fascist racial law (a very big WTF here in Italy) the italian occupation zone were safeplace for the jew expecially in Greece and France.
 
Thank you Lukedalton

Thank you, Lukedalton, that is good to know! While this website is for alternative history, I have learned a great deal of real history here.

Stubear1012
 
Well it certainly would change the Balkans set up, what do the Germans do about Yugoslavia? Does Prince Paul still sign the pact or with out the Italians involved in the war does he decide not to, would the British still depose the pro-Nazi government with the coup? What about Greece, Bulgaria, and Romania?
 
Top