WWI: Italy Stays Allied with Austria & Germany

What if Italy stayed allied with Germany and Austria-Hungary? I know Italy remained "neutral," but I was wondering if Italy did send troops to help the Central Powers, what would have changed?

1. Bulgaria and/or the Ottoman Empire wouldn't have entered.

2. France would be in a world of hurt.

3. Spain might have entered alongside Portugal, because they had possessions on the western Italian coast.

I also know Italy was "disunited." They weren't a united country until 1867/1871 onward. Also keep in mind that they had Austrian ancestry in the north, especially around Milan and Venice.
 
Last edited:
What if Italy stayed allied with Germany and Austria-Hungary? I know Italy remained "neutral," but I was wondering if Italy did send troops to help the Central Powers, what would have changed?

1. Bulgaria and/or the Ottoman Empire wouldn't have entered.

2. France would be in a world of hurt.

3. Spain might have entered alongside Portugal, because they had possessions on the western Italian coast.

I also know Italy was "disunited." They weren't a united country until 1848 onward. Also keep in mind that they had Austrian ancestry in the north, especially around Milan and Venice.


Is this a DBWI? Italy was united in 1866 (1871 some might argue). Spain had no such possessions, nor did Portugal.
 
What if Italy stayed allied with Germany and Austria-Hungary? I know Italy remained "neutral," but I was wondering if Italy did send troops to help the Central Powers, what would have changed?

Ok. PoD is August, 1914. Good up to here.

What changes? France has to guard it's southeast, Italy ties up troops that France would otherwise use in the northeast.

1. Bulgaria wouldn't have entered.

Why not?

2. France would be in a world of hurt.

More from troops being tied up than direct assault by the Italians, but yes.

3. Spain might have entered alongside Portugal, because they had possessions on the western Italian coast.

ASB. Less likely than Sweden entering the war to take Finland back from Russia.

I also know Italy was "disunited." They weren't a united country until 1867/1871 onward. Also keep in mind that they had Austrian ancestry in the north, especially around Milan and Venice.

South Tirol Italians were still under Austrian rule at this point. Milan and Venice? I don't buy it.

Ok, but wouldn't Italy be a threat to Spain?

Why would Italy be seen as a threat to Spain? By 1914, there's no way in hell Spain's going to try to press claims against Italy.

****

I'd keep it simple: German leadership is respectful towards Italian leadership, Italian leadership is receptive to offers of former Savoyard holdings in France (ok, yes, I'm going to invoke some old territorial claims, but here we're offering Italian lands to Italians), Corsica, and Tunisia. Austria plays ball, but only offers Trieste.

Given the carrot, Italy plays the pawn. It sits there doing nothing but distracting the other side's pieces. No Jutland in the Med, no offensive from Libya to Egypt. It just distracts the french on a narrow, rough terrain front. Maybe some contribution to a Russian campaign, but there's no commie menace or some such motivation. Unlikely to contribute against Serbia.

This increases pressure on the French and later British, further stretching their resources. An early breakthrough by the CP is more likely, and a collapse of Austria is likely to be slower.

Possible CP victory.
 
Last edited:
British and French navies destroy the Austrian and Italian navies. Italian economy enters collapse spiral as Italy is even more dependent on imports than Austria or Germany. Italian intra transport network is heavily dependent on coastal ships, RN sinks those. Italian troops are of questionable combat value at best. Italy has even less ability to protect its colonies than Germany did (other than SE Africa which had an over achieving oberst in military command anyone else would have surrendered in short order). I doubt Italy had a von Lettow Vorbeck in its colonies and the terrain isn't as helpful to such a campaign anyways.

Italy exists the war 1915 or perhaps 1916. Net result might be a plus for the Central Powers but the dead weight factor and over stressing of the German Railnet trying to feed and supply Italy would be huge that could push Germany over the edge either winter 1916-17 or 1917-18. I expect the bonus is for Austria and Bulgaria and a break even elsewhere. I don’t see an Entente Balkan Campaign after Serbia is KO’d and so Austria from some time in 1915 on has only a one front campaign to worry about. The effect of reduced stress on A-H can’t be overstated.

Michael
 
I'd keep it simple: German leadership is respectful towards Italian leadership, Italian leadership is receptive to offers of former Savoyard holdings in France (ok, yes, I'm going to invoke some old territorial claims, but here we're offering Italian lands to Italians), Corsica, and Tunisia. Austria plays ball, but only offers Trieste.

Agree totally. Italy could (ironically) gain more from this war than it did OTL. What about Malta?

Given the carrot, Italy plays the pawn. It sits there doing nothing but distracting the other side's pieces. No Jutland in the Med, no offensive from Libya to Egypt. It just distracts the french on a narrow, rough terrain front. Maybe some contribution to a Russian campaign, but there's no commie menace or some such motivation. Unlikely to contribute against Serbia.

I love the way you word it. Simply been there is a huge boost for the CP. It ties up French troops and frees CP troops. But I wonder what the Med would be like in this timeline.

This increases pressure on the French and later British, further stretching their resources. An early breakthrough by the CP is more likely, and a collapse of Austria is likely to be slower.

Possible CP victory.

I'd say it would be almost certain. Italy may also win in another way. The loss of the African Horn colonies are a possibility even if they win. That would in the long run be very good for Italy.
 
Of course, if Italy joins the Central Powers directly, then it is quite likely that the Ottoman Empire won't join the Central Powers (at least, it will be delayed a bit). Which could make Russia into slightly more of a threat to Germany...
 
The Italian's tie down some French forces in Savoy and Algeria, the Germans win the 'Race to the Sea' and hold the French channel coast down to 10km east of Dieppe.
AH moves it's navy to Taranto, joined by the Goben and Breslau. This joint battlefleet spends the next few months sneaking from one Italian port to another. Avoiding confrontation but giving the Anglo-French navies conniptions, they send their troop convoys from the east around Africa, slowing down the whole early 1915 buildup.
Utilising their coastal shipping lane through the Dover st German battlecruisers shell British coastal towns on the south coast, hurrying back the Germans lose the Blucher to RN BCs.
The Allies redeploy their fleets to counter these CP developments; a powerful A-F battlefleet is stationed in the Med to mark the combined fleet there, a task force is stationed in Portsmouth to intercept raiders in the channel, all the the detriment of the Grand Fleet.
Germany launches a huge offensive in the East in 1916, and by October the Russian govt has changed and is now led by Kerensky. The High Seas Fleet sorties at maximum strength to do battle with the GF off the Skaggerak, the battle ends in a marked tactical victory for the Germans. A post-battle German sortie in the Channel, west of the Cherbourg peninsula, stops shipping to the BEF for 3 days and in the western approaches for 4 days, causing panic in Britain.
The RN removes all capital ships from the Med fleet to bring them to home waters. The AH/Italian/German capital ships begin offensive operations against Entenete coastal and shipping targets, eventually bring the outnumbered French fleet to battle and defeat it, sustaining some serious losses in the process. This fleet then goes on a general offensive throughout the Med, known among the sailors as the 'Happy Time'.
Early 1917 the Soviet Union is created and capitulates. A general offensive is opened in France, which results in the besieging of Paris and a French capitualtion. Britain fights on.
Egypt is invaded and the RN is virtually powerless to intervene lest the HSF breaks out into the Atlantic again. Britain signs Armistace.
1919 the Greater German MittelEuropa is formalised.

How's that?
 
What if Italy stayed allied with Germany and Austria-Hungary? I know Italy remained "neutral," but I was wondering if Italy did send troops to help the Central Powers, what would have changed?

1. Bulgaria and/or the Ottoman Empire wouldn't have entered.

2. France would be in a world of hurt.

3. Spain might have entered alongside Portugal, because they had possessions on the western Italian coast.

I also know Italy was "disunited." They weren't a united country until 1867/1871 onward. Also keep in mind that they had Austrian ancestry in the north, especially around Milan and Venice.

Read up on your history. I don't think that Bulgaria and OE would be bothered or upset at Italy entering. France wouldn't be directly damaged by Italy, but Italy's military presence would have tied up French troops.

Spain had no possessions outside of Spain or Africa at this time. Also, WW1 was in 1914, which, IIRC, is AFTER 1866. :rolleyes:
 
Read up on your history. I don't think that Bulgaria and OE would be bothered or upset at Italy entering. France wouldn't be directly damaged by Italy, but Italy's military presence would have tied up French troops.

Spain had no possessions outside of Spain or Africa at this time. Also, WW1 was in 1914, which, IIRC, is AFTER 1866. :rolleyes:

The only reason why Bulgaria entered the war on the side of the Central Powers is because Italy left. I know my history. I'm majoring in it in college.
 
The only reason why Bulgaria entered the war on the side of the Central Powers is because Italy left. I know my history. I'm majoring in it in college.

You're also the one who seems to believe that Spain would tend to join WW1 for the expressed purpose of fighting Italy. I find that extremely doubtful, and I'm awaiting an explanation

Bulgaria's a different story. The inducements would be available, with or without Italian entry. The Serbian campaign was painful without Italy, the Greek campaign is still conceivable if French lines don't collapse, and Romania entering the war isn't impossible. These are all Bulgarian opponents that could bring Bulgaria into the fray. It might take longer, but there's a cause for Bulgaria to join the war if either Greece or Romania enter.

Romania had a choice in OTL. Greece, not so much.

In the case of Serbia, the fact that Italy entered the war with the CP could well encourage Bulgaria to join the fray, as it would look like a stronger faction than in OTL. The stalled Serbian campaign could in turn encourage Germany to push for Bulgaria to join so as to free up Austrians against Russia.
 
The Second Balkan War leaves Bulgaria with unfinshed business, mainly against Serbia.

When the Austro-Hungarians came rumbling along in 1914, Bulgaria were very tempted to have a go at reclaiming their 'Prussia of the Balkans' moniker.

ITTL, Serbia has one more enemy (Italy) and France has one more front needing troops. If Italian forces attack the Serbs, Serbia has more problems than in OTL.

Alternatively, Italy may go after Montenegro. This would allow the Austrians to use more troops on the Belgrade front.

France and Britain will have less available troops for Balkan adventures. This probably means no help for Serbia.

All of the above factors encourage Bulgaria to attack the Serbs. AFAIK, there is no problem of enmity between Rome and Sofia, so I don't understand why, given a better chance of success, Bulgaria doesn't attack the Serbs.

On the Ottoman front, there may be some problems due to Italy's seizure of Cyrenaicia and Tripolitania. This could result in Turkish non-belligerence. If this occurs, then the Russians will not have to fight in the Caucasus.

Another side-effect might see the Straits open to British and French merchant ships. This leads to supplies reaching Russia, and thus a stronger Russia.

However, betting that the Ottoman Empire and Czarist Russia will not fight each other is never a safe option.
 
The only reason why Bulgaria entered the war on the side of the Central Powers is because Italy left. I know my history. I'm majoring in it in college.

As others already said, Bulgaria has plenty of incentives to join the war, with or without Italy.

You're the one who's saying that Italy was still disunited by WW1, and that Spain had possessions in Italy that they'd fight to keep. Those are simply not true. Thus, why I said to read up on your history a little.
 
As others already said, Bulgaria has plenty of incentives to join the war, with or without Italy.

You're the one who's saying that Italy was still disunited by WW1, and that Spain had possessions in Italy that they'd fight to keep. Those are simply not true. Thus, why I said to read up on your history a little.

Ok, so I was wrong in that sense. Italy wasn't fully unified, even after the 1848 revolutions. Your cases for Bulgaria are good. However, Spain would join because Italy is on their southern border. Also, France was an ally of Spain. So by entering the war, Spain creates a wall to prevent Italy from attacking northward into France, thus shutting off the southern advance from Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire.
 
Ok, so I was wrong in that sense. Italy wasn't fully unified, even after the 1848 revolutions. Your cases for Bulgaria are good. However, Spain would join because Italy is on their southern border. Also, France was an ally of Spain. So by entering the war, Spain creates a wall to prevent Italy from attacking northward into France, thus shutting off the southern advance from Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire.

Italy was united after 1866. By WW1, which started in 1914, it was still united.

Also, Spain has no border with Italy at this time. Spain was not really affiliated with any other country for a while, which is why they were neutral for both worldwars.

Your last sentence didn't make any sense, either.
 
Italy was united after 1866. By WW1, which started in 1914, it was still united.

Also, Spain has no border with Italy at this time. Spain was not really affiliated with any other country for a while, which is why they were neutral for both worldwars.

Your last sentence didn't make any sense, either.

Alright, so maybe I'm an idiot....
 
Looking at a map when reviewing AH possibilities is helpful, particularly a series of maps.

The territories I outlined as a carrot for Italy were lands ceded to France in the previous century (other than Trieste and Tunisia), from Sardinia-Piedmont. That's the country which unified the rest of Italy under its rule. Trieste was an Austro-Hungarian port which was claimed by Italy and which was ceded to Italy as part of Versailles.

You can see this by looking at maps of 1848 through 1919.

With earlier maps, and with some slightly more obscure WW1 references, you can find claims on the Adriatic coastline on the basis of the Venetian republic's holdings and sparse Italian populations in the region. This was a carrot offered by the Entente.

But the most important map when looking at a warfare PoD is the map at that moment in time. Aragon had lands in the Italian peninsula. 20th century Spain did not.

Spain could have contributed troops to defend the Franco-Italian frontier, but it had zero reason to do so to the best of my knowledge. What sort of "alliance" are you referring to France and Spain having in this time period? Spanish support of the French during the Morocco Crisis?
 
Looking at a map when reviewing AH possibilities is helpful, particularly a series of maps.

The territories I outlined as a carrot for Italy were lands ceded to France in the previous century (other than Trieste and Tunisia), from Sardinia-Piedmont. That's the country which unified the rest of Italy under its rule. Trieste was an Austro-Hungarian port which was claimed by Italy and which was ceded to Italy as part of Versailles.

You can see this by looking at maps of 1848 through 1919.

With earlier maps, and with some slightly more obscure WW1 references, you can find claims on the Adriatic coastline on the basis of the Venetian republic's holdings and sparse Italian populations in the region. This was a carrot offered by the Entente.

But the most important map when looking at a warfare PoD is the map at that moment in time. Aragon had lands in the Italian peninsula. 20th century Spain did not.

Spain could have contributed troops to defend the Franco-Italian frontier, but it had zero reason to do so to the best of my knowledge. What sort of "alliance" are you referring to France and Spain having in this time period? Spanish support of the French during the Morocco Crisis?
Yeah, Italy Went into The Great War Looking to Pick The Pockets of its Neighbours ...

It Simply Wound up Allying with The Highest Bidder ...

The REAL Irony is if Austria-Hungary had Maintained Any Kind of Actual Cohesion, The Italian Gains at The End of The War would have been Even Less than in OTL!

:eek:
 
Top