Franco-Italian War in the early to mid 30s

[fasquardon]

Mussolini seems to have been rather keen to expand at French expense in OTL, but nothing much came of it before Germany smashed France in 1940.

I am curious what people think would happen if France and Italy ended up in a shooting war before Germany completed its re-armament. As an example, say Popular-Front France intervenes on behalf of the Republican Spanish in the civil war. The great fears of the Popular-Front do not materialize, so the Radicals (that is, the most centrist of the French political parties at the time), while not exactly pro-intervention, at least don't bring down the government and the military, while again not filled with enthusiasm, at least don't stage a coup against the government and follow their orders. But Benny the Moose decides that this is his chance, and declares war against France "in support of the legitimate Spanish government" (though his real aims are Tunisia, Corsica, Nice and Djibouti for himself).

How would such a war go? How would the minor and major powers react? Can France win the war before Germany is sufficiently rearmed to squash them flat? Or might such a war make France sufficiently willing to appease Hitler that Germany can free itself from the shackles of Versailles without needing to go to war in the west, and instead Germany is able to throw her full might into a war against the Soviets while the Western powers are distracted by the wars in the Western Med?

fasquardon

 

[Falecius]

Interesting scenario.
The point is that, of course, it is Italy that would be stomped flat, relatively quickly I think.
Short of treason behind the French lines, there is relatively little to stop them to march into Turin and Milan if not Rome.
The Alps are terrible for warfare, but the Italians showed in 1940 to be utterly unprepared for that kind of fighting (despite bing in theory the most experienced power in that area). On the sea, I think it's not even a contest.
Hitler however would be overjoyed. This would free him to do essentially whatever the fuck he wants in Eastern Europe with nobody stopping him.

 

[lukedalton]

Interesting scenario.
The point is that, of course, it is Italy that would be stomped flat, relatively quickly I think.
Short of treason behind the French lines, there is relatively little to stop them to march into Turin and Milan if not Rome.
The Alps are terrible for warfare, but the Italians showed in 1940 to be utterly unprepared for that kind of fighting (despite bing in theory the most experienced power in that area). On the sea, I think it's not even a contest.
Hitler however would be overjoyed. This would free him to do essentially whatever the fuck he wants in Eastern Europe with nobody stopping him.

The problem is that the alps obstacle work both way and in OTL Benny ordered the attack through them only because he thought that the war will end soon and the French were on the last leg.
Here in that theatre we will see a repeat of WWI with both side holed up on their defense line plus equipment wise Italy is not so bad respect France (at this time, not counting that the army is still under the old structure and this is an advantage) that have is big problem in term of materials, men, doctrine, morale, etc.
The only real action will happen in North Africa and in the end will be a battle on who make the less pathetic show and with a status quo ante as result.
The good thing is that the French can use this more limited war for see where their armed forces have problems so to correct them making Germany job much more difficult or even impossible.

 

[Ultima Ratio]

The French had the best armor at the time. The question is if their outdated dictrines allow them to cut through the Alps?

Alternatively: if they achieve superiority at sea (which is pretty much a given), can they land enough troops in Northern Italy to bypass the Italian lines, or at least help the offensive with naval artillery and such?


How were French paratroopers and the air force? Did the French have any idea about combined arms warfare?

 

[fhaessig]

How were French paratroopers and the air force?

The first 2 french paratroopers groups (GIAs) were officially operational in April 1937.

http://www.commando-air.fr/154.html

 

[Whumbly]

The French had the best armor at the time. The question is if their outdated dictrines allow them to cut through the Alps?

Alternatively: if they achieve superiority at sea (which is pretty much a given), can they land enough troops in Northern Italy to bypass the Italian lines, or at least help the offensive with naval artillery and such?


How were French paratroopers and the air force? Did the French have any idea about combined arms warfare?

At the time Colonel de Gaulle had theories and tactics similar to blitzkrieg. Unfortunately most of the French Generals relied on the old tactics of using tanks to support infantry and while they where superior tanks they were slow moving due to all that armour and armament.

The paratroopers were relatively new, created in 1935 with about two combat units, so they're too small and too inexperienced to achieve anything.

The airforce is small due to the fact that the French aeronautical industry is mainly made up of many small companies that work on craftsmanship rather than production. Though they were nationalised in 1936, it's too early to effect anything.

I'm fairly sure the French would have naval superiority, as the Italians are still playing catch up with upgrading their ships. This generally would lead to an advantage in the North African Theatre.

So I predict a stalemate in the Alps, as the French focus on their defensive doctrines, while testing out offensive tactics in Libya.

 

[wildviper121]

1) Embargoes on Italy by UK, maybe US depending on how they're feeling

2) Republican Spain most likely wins--Italy no issue for France so they can devote some soldiers to take down the dirty Nationalists.

3) ^Then again, if Mussolini is confident enough in a war against France he must've developed a military, or have been more crazy than OTL

4) After the war (let's assumed Italy lost control of the Mediterranean and then their colonies and then surrendered. Maybe Mussolini usurped), France is going to be much more reluctant to get into another war. And Hitler would be much less reluctant.

5) If Hitler defeats France and the war continues as OTL minus Italy's involvement, both Italy (if Mussolini was usurped) and Spain (assuming the Republicans won) are going to be targets as well. If Germany invades Spain, the Allies have another country to invade (Spain would be in something of an alliance with France by then for their support, and would be incorporated into the Allies). Italy would also be a target by Germany. Maybe USSR meets the Allies farther west in Germany than OTL because they spend some of their military liberating Spain?

6) If above scenario happens, Portugal's not going to join the Allies. They have Germany on their border.

 

[MattII]

Libya is taken by the French in short order, since Tripoli is less than 200 km from the Tunisian border, is utterly lacking in defences, and has a rail-line running from Zuwarah, just 60 km from the border.

 

[fasquardon]

I can't imagine the French in this period planning or desiring to launch a deep invasion of Italy. Nor would I expect Italy to try to force the alpine passes. Rather, both armies hunker down on the boarder to secure the flank while they try and find each-others' soft underbellies.

In those soft underbellies, I think the French will have the advantage. They have better tanks, their artillery is about equal to that of the Italians, as I understand it (but this is a guess - anyone else have actual knowledge to back this up - or to dispel my illusions?) I am also betting that while France has a disadvantage in manpower, they would be more willing to mobilize completely for the war, and thus have numeric superiority on the field. As I understand it, the French would have a fairly substantial advantage in truck production.

I can see both sides experimenting alot with air-power and using bombers. I know both had some rather good aviation industries, but I have no idea how they compare. My impression is that the Italians would have the edge in production to start with... Lessee, Rise and fall of the Great Powers gives French/Italian aircraft production at: 890/1000 in 1936 and 3163/2000 in 1939. Note that both Italian figures are only estimates. So pretty close, but with the French having the long-run advantage.

Would the French fleet have such an easy time in winning? My impression is that the Italian navy was good at what they did, aggressive (when they had the oil for it) and possessed decent ships. And Italy and France had the same tonnage limits under the Washington Naval Treaty. If either side gets a run of luck as good as Japan's WW2 naval luck, or as bad as Britain's luck in the naval war, it changing the whole course of the conflict.

As I understand it, France has a much larger and more capable submarine force than Italy, and the doctrines to make them hurt.

Land-based airpower would be important is such a naval confrontation...

I would imagine that Spain and North Africa would see alot of action. I do wonder if it will really be as easy for France in Spain as people seem to think. Particularly if the French enter the war too late to stop Franco crossing from Africa to Spain.

Does anyone know how loyal the Italian settlers in Tunisia and Italian immigrants in France itself would be? My impression is that as much as Benny the Moose would claim them as his own, they would be more inclined to consider themselves French...

I must say, I have a rather cute mental image of the French sending de Gaulle to Tunisia to get the dangerously political colonel out of the way, and we end up with a very different Desert Fox...

I do wonder what the rest of the world would be doing...

I think Britain would be opposed to French intervention, but on the other hand I expect they are at this point going to do their best to keep France strong to help them contain Germany... I imagine the British would also be rather upset with the Italians attacking a fellow member of the Strasa Front. There won't be any loans or selling of munitions to either side, but I can see Britain taking a loose approach to selling France "non-military goods". The Royal Navy will have a very large influence in shaping how the naval conflict goes. I imagine that the RN patrolling aggressively in the shipping lanes near the war-zone (to protect the freedom of trade, of course) might happen, though I am not sure if the British would be so aggressive with a rearming Germany on their doorstep... Would they try and keep the war out of the Atlantic? Away from the main commercial routes in the Med? Or take a hands off approach?

A Franco-Italian war might be the one thing that could encourage Britain to talk to the Soviets about this German problem...

Both Yugoslavia and Romania are French allies at this point, and could potentially effect the war quite a bit. Would the Romanians stop selling oil to the Italians? Would the Yugoslavs consider attacking Italy in the East?

What would Germany do? Would Hitler use this as an opportunity to stick it to the French and supply everything he can to the Italians and the Nationalist Spanish? Or would he keep his powder dry and cozy up to Britain by loudly blacklisting the trade of the French and Italians (and of course, channeling all Germany's resources into her own rearmament?

And what about Poland? While at this point the Poles didn't have much confidence in their alliance with France, now their most powerful ally is definitely out for the count if Germany pulls anything... I kinda expect this would lead to Poland cozying up to the Germans more, since I think it is nigh on ASB for Poland to choose the Soviets over the Germans. Might Germany be able to bully the Poles into giving up the corridor before the war in the west is done?

As for the war itself. I rather expect the limiting factor for both powers will be their finances (weak, in both cases) and unless WW2 breaks out before they make peace, I don't see it ever getting to the point of being a total war like WW1 or 2.

Any other thoughts?

And what do people think would happen if such a war happened earlier or later in the 30s? While the start of Spanish Civil War is the most likely spark to set off Franco-Italian tensions, it can't be the only one, and with how fast events were moving in the 30s, I can see even shifting the war by a few months could lead to radically different situations...

fasquardon

 

[zert]

Some factors to this scenario is just when France might decide to help the Republicans, The later the departure, the stronger Germany might be. Italy is screwed in the long run unless Benny and his Boys grow some balls and get their military up to snuff.

 

[Derwit]

Any other thoughts?

And what do people think would happen if such a war happened earlier or later in the 30s? While the start of Spanish Civil War is the most likely spark to set off Franco-Italian tensions, it can't be the only one, and with how fast events were moving in the 30s, I can see even shifting the war by a few months could lead to radically different situations...

fasquardon[/QUOTE]

I think if WW2 starts earlier its got to be a great advantage to the Wallies. The German rearmament was only really bearing fruit by 1939. The comparative advantage between the French and German forces (both in quality and quantity) only really turns in Germany's advantage this year (yes the French army wasn't as good as everyone believed, but it could still stomp Germany on its own until late 1937).

 

[GarethC]

French success in North Africa in 1937 may trigger a popular uprising in Ethiopia.

There will be considerable populist support for the Ethiopians in Britain - while outright war is unlikely, Suez may well be closed to Italian shipping, and while London will magnanimously offer to broker some sort of peace deal, it will be one where the Abyssinian Empire regains its independence.

The naval war in the Med is not so certain, though. While the Littorios are still building, Italian air in the SM.79 has one of the best antishipping platforms in the world at the time, and the AdA does not appear to have been a capable force in 1940 after significantly more time to rearm and prepare. Having said that, the perception of a war against Italy is likely to be a "back in time for tea and medals" one, so the AdA may have a very different vision of war than they provided against the Luftwaffe OTL.

And what do people think would happen if such a war happened earlier or later in the 30s? While the start of Spanish Civil War is the most likely spark to set off Franco-Italian tensions, it can't be the only one, and with how fast events were moving in the 30s, I can see even shifting the war by a few months could lead to radically different situations...

In 1935, while the Abyssinian Crisis is still running, the Anglo-German Naval Treaty is still looking valid, and France not yet in the fiscal crisis in '36, you might get an Anglo-French opportunist alliance that aims (and, let's be honest, succeeds utterly) in evicting Italy from Africa entire. With the RN Med force and the bulk of the Marine Nationale, and with all sides' air power not being as capable against shipping as it would be in four years' time, the Regia Marina is outnumbered by bigger and more modern ships with bigger guns.

 

[MarkA]

A way to make this possible may be the following.

Hitler reoccupies the Rhineland March 1936 (OTL)

France does not intervene because of lack of British support and lack of unity at home. Italy offers support if intervention by Allies goes ahead (OTL)

The far right in France shifts a little to the view that German activity is a direct threat that is aimed specifically at France. (ATL)

Spanish Civil War starts with the military uprising 17/18 July 1936 and proceeds as OTL including the African Army successfully getting to the mainland.

ATL France warns the Nationalists that if the rebellion continues France may intervene. The British refuse to support the French but are persuaded to urge a ceasefire. The Nationalists refuse.

The bombing of Guernica 26 April 1936 was seen by France as an opportunity to assert its authority. After continual refusal by Franco to negotiate a peaceful solution and intervention by Germany and Italy the French government with the support of influential right wing figures intervened in the war.

After warnings from Paris, the Germans withdrew their nationals but Italy refused.

 

[Falecius]

The problem is that the alps obstacle work both way and in OTL Benny ordered the attack through them only because he thought that the war will end soon and the French were on the last leg.
Here in that theatre we will see a repeat of WWI with both side holed up on their defense line plus equipment wise Italy is not so bad respect France (at this time, not counting that the army is still under the old structure and this is an advantage) that have is big problem in term of materials, men, doctrine, morale, etc.
The only real action will happen in North Africa and in the end will be a battle on who make the less pathetic show and with a status quo ante as result.
The good thing is that the French can use this more limited war for see where their armed forces have problems so to correct them making Germany job much more difficult or even impossible.

True: the alpine theater would suck for the French too.

 

[MattII]

On the Alpine border maybe, but remember, the French and Italian colonies in North Africa are next to each other, and France holds most of the aces in open combat.

 

[lukedalton]

On the Alpine border maybe, but remember, the French and Italian colonies in North Africa are next to each other, and France holds most of the aces in open combat.

Not really, their industry is messed up almost as the italian and equipment wise they don't have any overwhelming or even significative advantage and their doctrine...well have lots of problem.
In the end the winner will be : who sucked less in the art of war

 

[MattII]

Not really, their industry is messed up almost as the italian and equipment wise they don't have any overwhelming or even significative advantage and their doctrine...well have lots of problem.
In the end the winner will be : who sucked less in the art of war

Actually, they have the Char B1, which is going to be very tough for the Italians to beat, especially as the Italians only seem to have a very few light-tanks this early in the piece.

 

[lukedalton]

Actually, they have the Char B1, which is going to be very tough for the Italians to beat, especially as the Italians only seem to have a very few light-tanks this early in the piece.

The problem with the Char is the terrain, it can be used only if the italian pass the alps and in Libya it will be not that usefull due to sand and heat.

 

[fasquardon]

The bombing of Guernica 26 April 1936 was seen by France as an opportunity to assert its authority. After continual refusal by Franco to negotiate a peaceful solution and intervention by Germany and Italy the French government with the support of influential right wing figures intervened in the war.

After warnings from Paris, the Germans withdrew their nationals but Italy refused.

Guernica happened in 1937, I am guessing you made a typo there.

I like the atrocity being what pushes France over the edge, since at that point the British sympathies will be for the Republicans, and keeping Britain on-side for a future confrontation with the Germans was at the heart of French policy at this time.

Checking on the dates, even if the French got involved at the start of the Spanish Civil War, it is still after the Rhineland Crisis. A necessary PoD for France getting involved is for something to be done that would make them feel less frightened of Germany, or something to convince them that they can save Spain quickly. As much as France gets a bad rap for having poor military doctrine, parts of the French army had very good ideas for how to fight a fast war - it's just that no-one expected a new war with Germany to be fast, and Germany was the main enemy. I wonder if there is a plausible way for all the French good ideas to gel together into a proposal that would convince the political and military establishment that they can intervene and finish in Spain quickly...

I am really not sure if the French would beat the Italians as easily as some people are thinking though... Yes, they have alot of advantages, but I have no idea how the French navy and the AdA would be likely to perform in a war like this and much depends on them. The French navy had good ships at this point, I remember that, I don't know if the leadership is going to use the ships to their best effect though. The AdA, I think will perform much better than in 1939. They aren't starting a war mid-reaming, so they will have (for 1937) some of the best kit flying. Many of the leadership mistakes in 1939 were also because the AdA was focused on saving its strength for a long drawn out war (and saving its strength for when they had the right planes). Obviously a very bad mistake against Germany, in this situation, I am not sure how they would play their cards. Certainly, the French army, navy and AdA will make mistakes, but I am not sure if they will make more mistakes than the Italians, or less.

I am inclined to think that the pressure on the French to get in and get out quick will push their military leaders to be as aggressive as they possibly can. So that means their performance will be much better than 1939 would lead us to believe, but on the other hand, I would think that observers at the time will be expecting the mighty French army to whup the Italians and the Nationalists like red-headed step-children, and there is simply no way the war would be that easy for them. So lots of disappointed French patriots, pleased Germans and worried Brits...

One thought on Libya: the Italians could face a Senussi revolt if the French manage to humiliate them in this theater.

fasquardon

 

[Saphroneth]

I think if WW2 starts earlier its got to be a great advantage to the Wallies. The German rearmament was only really bearing fruit by 1939. The comparative advantage between the French and German forces (both in quality and quantity) only really turns in Germany's advantage this year (yes the French army wasn't as good as everyone believed, but it could still stomp Germany on its own until late 1937).

IIRC, Germany basically picked THE year to fight. If they'd gone earlier, France would have stomped them. Later, their economy implodes under the strain while the Brits have spare Hurricanes coming out of their ears, rendering it air parity if not Wallies air superiority and invalidating Sickle-cut as a possible strategy. They have to fight a war of material attrition against Britain and France put together, a losing recipe.