Italy remains neutral in WW2?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

The Basket said:
If Italy stays neutral and things go badly for Germany and Japan then it will stay out, cut ties with Germany and be best pals with America.
Click to expand...
Japan is in the biggest pickle here and I'm not sure it can be peacefully unwound. For starters the IJA is the political power of the land, the Emperor being much more closer to a UK-like figurehead, albeit with more godly respect than we might imagine. By 1939-40 the IJA is deep in China and in Sept 1940 after the fall of France has now invaded French Indo-China (FIC). Japan received (unto now) most of its oil and much of its industrial materials from the USA, but the USA has cut Japan off and is demanding that Japan withdraw from both China and FIC before the USA will turn the taps back on. This is the three-part challenge for Japan, they need a face savings exit, the IJA will look foolish to the IJN and the politicians and people, and of course China will soon unify and come looking for revenge, likely upon Korea to start.

Meanwhile by 1941 Japan is almost out of oil and foreign currency, facing massive inflation and scarcities, which eventually forced the IJN, against Yamamoto's advice to preemptively strike the USA in order to get the oil and resources from the DEI and Malaya, which in itself was ill-conceived because Japan had no way to get the oil from the DEI to Japan or to its forces in China, and also unlike the DEI government had no way of selling this now massive surplus of oil on the open market, and thus no means of gaining foreign currency.

In these circumstances I just don't see how Japan can stand down, unless Yamamoto and the IJN lead a revolt against the IJA and seize power, and then turn this power over to the Emperor and the civilian politicians.
 
Admiral Beez said:
If Italy can hold its neutrality what do we see its air force looking like by 1944? Older fighters like the Fiat CR.32, CR.42 and G.50, plus the Macchi C.200 should be replaced. Can Italy have just one or two single seat fighters?
Click to expand...

They understood that they'd modernized too early. I'm sure we'd be seeing more modern designs in the pipeline.
 
I doubt Italy and Japan had any cross over so what Japan does has no import to Italy.

Italy was against Nazi Germany in the early days and it was Ethiopia which was the tipping point and led to Berlin.

Interesting point whether Italy hindered Germany or Italy helped Germany but had Italy gone to war with Germany then the war may not have happened in the first place.
 
If Britain is not at war with Italy and Italy can be trusted not to start war then it can be noted that large amounts of naval power will be diverted. So IJN could be facing a much stronger force if Italy stays neutral.

The most positive effect Italy had was causing losses to the RN and keeping large naval forces in the Med. Had Force Z had the full Mediterranean fleet then maybe Japan wouldn't have kicked off.
 
The Basket said:
If Britain is not at war with Italy and Italy can be trusted not to start war then it can be noted that large amounts of naval power will be diverted. So IJN could be facing a much stronger force if Italy stays neutral.
Click to expand...
I agree. But Britain will likely unwittily wait until Barbarossa begins and then wait to confirm that Germany has bitten off more than it can chew and that Italy is firmly neutral.

Thus the British fleet sails for Singapore in October 1941, just as it did historically....only this time it's likely the four or five QE class battleships (or three KGV class if Bismarck, Tirpitz, Scharnhorst and Gneisenau are dealt with) plus HMS Ark Royal, Illustrious, Formidable, Victorious and Indomitable (with Fulmars, Sea Hurricanes, Albacores and Swordfish), plus a dozen cruisers and two dozen destroyers, plus submarines. Following behind are a large convoy of troopships and transports destined to offload at Singapore.

Waiting for them in the Bay of Bengal (if they can get into position undiscovered) or South China Sea (if not) is an expanded Kido Butai with Akagi, Kaga, Sōryū, Hiryū, Shōkaku, Zuikaku plus Ryūjō and every cruiser and destroyer available. The British air group is first erased, and then the fleet is destroyed. Next the IJN sets its sights on the USN, and with this destruction of the RN there's a good chance the USN will mobilize all its CVs and position them at Pearl Harbour, ripe for an attack.

IMO, Italy's involvement in the war saved the RN from getting thoroughly beat down in the PTO from Dec 1941 to Midway in June 1942.
 
Last edited:
Admiral Beez said:
If Italy can hold its neutrality what do we see its air force looking like by 1944? Older fighters like the Fiat CR.32, CR.42 and G.50, plus the Macchi C.200 should be replaced. Can Italy have just one or two single seat fighters?
Click to expand...

Probably, staying out of war, Italy could afford to modernize its forces, while cutting the total numbers (and costs). New Regia Aeronautica which is lean and mean?
 
It would be pure hilarity if the IJN thinks it can take on the full fat RN for lunch and then the USN even with the old battleships for dinner.

Bad luck, bad weather and that's that.

A full fat RN battle fleet at Singapore would be lunacy for the IJN to show up especially if the USN are next week.

I can see flaws.
 
Me too. But the entire Japanese war plan was based on fantasy, hyper and unwarranted optimism and willful ignorance.

But had the IJN engaged and defeated the RN would the US Congress support a DoW on Japan? I think not, at least until Japan invades the DEI.
 
Last edited:
1941 would be a tricky year for IJN because no Shokaku or Zuikaku until late in the year and no Yamato or Musashi at all and some other front line battleships like Yamishiro and Ise are not exactly top notch.

So the outcome of a neutral Italy would be the Empire able to expand and expend greater resources on it's far east processions and perhaps make Japan think twice before getting silly.

So maybe Japan benefits the most from Italian war.
 
Unless Japan struck actual U.S. territory (The Philippines), I doubt the U.S. would enter the war. Isolationism was very strong in the U.S. The DEI was a European colony. "None of our business. We're not going to be dragged into a European conflict!".
 
Japan invading the DEI requires an invasion fleet to sail right past the Philippines. This would not be considered as a European conflict.

It would be ironic if through Japan attacking the Italian concession and navy (presumably enlarged to protect trade) in China that Rome declared war before Washington.
 
Last edited:

My understanding is that the main reason Japan attacked PH is because they really wanted to neutralize the flank threat that the PI provided, and knew that to take and hold the PI meant attacking PacFleet. Yamamoto insisted on doing that while it was in harbor rather than the traditional Japanese plan of Decisive Battle, probably because he was looking for breathing-time so the NEI and Singapore could be squared away.

The point being that the Japanese were in no mood to tolerate the PI flanking both attack forces, and the shipping lanes that would be used to bring the oil and rubber back to domestic factories.
 
While the Italian Army was not first rate (although some units, such as the Alpini -- the mountain troops someone said Italy didn't have -- and the Bersaglieri were quite good, most of the army was inadequately trained and poorly equipped), much of the blame for that could be placed on the army's leadership. It's performance on the Soviet Front was hampered by poor equipment, mediocre leadership, and generally poor logistics, some of which was the fault of the Germans.
 
It was posited that the U. S. wouldn't declare war until the DEI was attacked. It might've ticked off FDR to have the IJN cruise by the Philippines but unless actually attacked, I doubt the isolationist 'States would care. Of course, as was also noted, Imperial Japanese strategy was based in part on moonbeams, wishful thinking and prejudice. Not unlike other powers. So, warm up the radar at Opana.
 
I tend to agree, but FDR will have his work cut out for him when, whilst the US sits on its hands Japan has secured control over FIC, DEI, Burma, Malaya, Singapore, Hong Kong, PNG, the Solomons, basically everything on the below map minus the Philippines, Guam, Wake, etc. That's a lot of red.

Is the USA really going to sit while Japan consolidates all these gains? When Australia and India are invaded the US will have no one to fight alongside. It's the PTO version of Martin Niemöller's famous poem.

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

SMGs in ww2 with much smaller cartridges?
2 3
Replies
53
Views
2K
Admiral Beez
A
Modern Jets in WW2/WW1
Replies
4
Views
916
GreenKnight121
A
Regia Aeronautica if Italy Remains Neutral in WW2
Replies
8
Views
957
Howard Gibson
Making better Italian aircraft, 1933~1945
3 4 5
Replies
86
Views
3K
Shortround6
S
Biplanes for ww2: where could've these still mattered?
2
Replies
25
Views
540
Shortround6
S
Menu
Log in
Register