Plausibility Check: Neutral Italy in WWI?

[Fenrir_Angerboda]

exactly as it says on the tin.
how plausible is it to keep Italy completly Neutral in WWI?

discuse please.
sorry if it's been done.

 

[David S Poepoe]

I think its very plausible. The Italians by 1914 had already fallen out with the Austrians over their annexation of Bosnia-Hercegovina and it didn't help that you had Field Marshal Conrad in Vienna calling for a preemptive war against Italy. The Italians had started drifting from the Triple Alliance as early as 1900.

When the Italians did enter the war things were going so badly for them at the beginning that one could consider that the nation wasn't behind the King nor the army. The Battle of Caporetto and the near collapse of the Italian Army really changed things and galvanized public opinion in favor of the Army. The Italians really came close to being knocked out there and its too bad that the Germans didn't recognize this fact.

However, much as in Greece, its likely that neutrality would have been very hard to obtain with the amount of pressure that the Allies could place on a country to get it to change its mind.

 

[Fenrir_Angerboda]

However, much as in Greece, its likely that neutrality would have been very hard to obtain with the amount of pressure that the Allies could place on a country to get it to change its mind.

That's something I was thinking about.
is there away to get most of the European powers to ignore Italy?
I know it's probably impossible, but.....

 

[Cornelius]

is there away to get most of the European powers to ignore Italy?
I know it's probably impossible, but.....

I've always had the impression that the entente sought italian intervention just to ease the german pressure in France. So maybe a less successful Germany in 1914 could be enough; of course this POD could make the cntral powers to pressure Italy on their side to break the impasse...

Another way, with which I've been toying around for a while, could be to have a sort of crisis in Italy during those years that prevented the government to join the war. I'm actually thinking of dinastic crisis like, for example, Vittorio Emanuele dying in an accident, leaving young Umberto II as heir, but a political one could do the trick anyway. Italy got one of the strongest socialist party in the west after all.

 

[Grey Wolf]

Italy only entered because of 2 things

-1- The Dardanelles which seemed to show that the Entente had the capability to carry the war to the enemy, and promise the likelihood of victory if Italy joined them

-2- The Entente powers promised Italy every one of its war aims - and the Italians were dumb enough to believe them !

Even then, the actual means by which Italy entered the war was unconstitutional

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

 

[Jimbrock]

-2- The Entente powers promised Italy every one of its war aims - and the Italians were dumb enough to believe them !

The Entente offered Italy certain promises, definately not ALL of its war aims. And in normal diplomacy, if a bunch of world powers give you their word on something and promise, and you suffer for it, theyre supposed to give you what they promised.

Anyway, I doubt you could get them neutral. Italy hated France for Nice, Savoy and Corsica, beating them to Tunisia, and believe it or not, yes, betraying them after Plombiers. Italy hated Austria much more, for obvious reasons of oppresion, occupying and controlling a lot of Italy for about half a century, and the Italian areas like Trent, Trieste, Fiume, etc.

You really need to cook up a disaster, like Cornelius said, but a really big one. One that could make Italy forget all those things and stay out of the war.

If the sides fight eachother to a standstill, by the near end of the war they could always squeeze concessions from them by offering not to join the other side... *scheme*

 

[Fenrir_Angerboda]

Who's the Board's Resident Italian History expert?
they might be able to help