Military Development in Nuetral Italy

[Carl Schwamberger]

I've read a number of threads discussing the fallout if Italy remains nuetral in 1940 & for a couple years after. One Item I've not seen discussed under this WI would be the course of Italian arms development and rearmament.

Anyone have any insight into what the Italian military would look like after 18 months of nuetrality - at the end of 1941?

[Carl Schwamberger]

Damm, I thuought this question would bring out the Italian army fans and aircraft experts

[DrG]

At first I thought to write in this thread, but then I understood that there are way too many variables involved. It is a "what if" 18-months-long which would require so many assumptions to make it more similar to science fiction than to any counterfactual history exercise. Probably, in short, the only answer would be: the Italian armed forces, in your scenario, would be larger than historically (no losses suffered) and worse equipped than they were actually in Dec. 1941. I say "worse equipped" because, without the grim experiences of the winter of 1940-41, the same mistakes made in the Thirties would have been repeated again and again, while the initial defeats, along with the German example, were useful to make better choices.
The availability of commodities for the war industries would have been very low anyway, because of the naval blockade, and, meanwhile, the Germans would have provided even less resources or weapons than they did, given that in your scenario Italy was neutral (a long neutrality that would have been seen as suspect by Germany, by the way).
But, as I wrote, I fear that what you are asking is really difficult to imagine rationally, I am sorry I can't contribute much more.

Guido

[Kingfish]

Anyone have any insight into what the Italian military would look like after 18 months of nuetrality - at the end of 1941?

My amateur-ish guess is probably not much different, since historically there was very little development and innovation even after years of combat experience in East and North Africa, the Balkans and Russia. Consider that even as late as mid-'43 the Italian armored units were going to battle with a tank not much different than what fought the British during Operation Compass. There wasn't a tracked personnel/weapons carrier, even though they had first hand knowledge on how versatile the British universal carrier was in the North African Desert.

[jwsleser]

I haven't gone into the books, but the info is there.

Army using 7.35 cal. small arms, fully equipped with the 47mm c.c., moderized artilery, more trucks, etc. Divisional structure and number of divisions wouldn't have changed, just better equipped divisions. The only thing I am unsure about is tanks. Cerrtainly far more M13s available in armored divisions, all CV/L series tankettes in infantry support battalions.

Much would depend on whether Italy exported weapons during this period, and whether lesons learned by other countries would change equipment requirements.

Not up on RM or RA. Certainly a better army.

Pista!

Jeff

[Dili]

It will be expected that they will start develop aircraft carriers, like they did, they will dust of the radar experiments probably.

At Regia Aeronautica they are in dire straits assuming they don't get any engine from Germans or British, maybe USA ? They will try to get their hands in anything to copy even buying Yugoslav plans from DB601 and or Merlin. It all depend on engines they get.
I think very much of it depends on Italy-USA relations.

[DrG]

Just a few questions that, in my opinion, the participants to this thread should make to themselves before posting:
- why in neutral Italy political and military leaders should act in a more clever way than in real history? (usually it's experience that makes you wiser, not inactivity, expecially in a country that, apparently, had learned nearly nothing from obseving foreign armed forces)
- with what money would Italy pay for the increased imports of strategic materiels needed to expand its military forces? (Italy was barely able to sustain its peace time imports, its currency and gold reserves were declining dramatically; Guarneri, minister of Exchanges and Currencies, in his memoirs recalls how Italy was unable to stockpile more commodities during the non-belligerency of 1939-40 because it lacked the money to pay them)
- who would provide these imports, how and why? (Britain made a strict naval blockade of Italy, which would have prevented seaborne imports of strategic materiels; Germany, on the other hand, was already exporting coal to Italy almost to the limits of its railway system, and of that of Switzerland, and had no will at all to spare further commodities with Italy, even when it was a warring ally, to a neutral Italy the Germans would have exported even less, and maybe not even the coal)

Guido

PS The Carcano mod. 91/38 (caliber 7.35 mm) was not produced for the Italian army since the beginning of WW2, well before Italy's declaration of war, because, rightly, it was feared that not enough rifles would have been available to equip the whole Regio Esercito if Italy had entered the war. The choice of developing aircraft carriers was taken in Feb. 1941, after Taranto's night and the evaluation of British use of naval air force. Thus: no war = no Italian aircraft carriers. It's an example of how war experience was useful in the development of Italian armed forces.

[jwsleser]

Guido

Just a few questions that, in my opinion, the participants to this thread should make to themselves before posting:

I agree with the thoughts behind your points. Please note that everything I stated was in place before Italy entered the war. Without the war, production of the M38 series weapons (the M91/38 was the 6.5mm version), the M38 LMG, etc. likely would have continued. No reason to stop and the M91 series could be sold to other countries. The M47/32 c.c. was planned to replace all the 65mm infantry guns, the new artillery was coming off the production lines, M13/40s were in the works, etc.

As for paying for things, I agree. This was the reasoning behind my comment...

Much would depend on whether Italy exported weapons during this period,

Military sales was a significant source of hard cash. How many of the new weapons would be sold to balance imports?

Again I can't comment on the RM and RA, but the RE was on the road of reequipping/modernizing without any new wartime decisions.

Pista!

Jeff

[Carl Schwamberger]

I see the fundamental point about many variables. A few trends can be identified, but one cant count on their being slowed, accelerated, or ended without some political definitions. Still those trend existed and can serve as a starting point.

[Dili]

Thus: no war = no Italian aircraft carriers. It's an example of how war experience was useful in the development of Italian armed forces.

I disagree after first war success the development of aircraft carriers would start. It wasn't something completely alien to Regia Marina.

[DrG]

I disagree after first war success the development of aircraft carriers would start. It wasn't something completely alien to Regia Marina.

If it had been for the Regia Marina, Italy would have had an aircraft carrier at least by the early Thirties. But it was only after British succesful use of aircraft carriers against Italy that Mussolini finally agreed with the Navy and stopped to listen to the Regia Aeronautica.
Anyway, with the exception of the hunt to the Bismarck, there were no important uses of aicraft carriers outside the Mediterranean between June 1940 and Pearl Harbour (which, without Taranto, certainly would have been planned in a different way).
So, a neutral Italy would:
- go on without aircraft carriers;
- plan to build them not in Feb. 1941 but in May 1941 (after the Bismarck sinking).
Of course, only provided that Italian neutrality hadn't changed anything in the course of world history, an assumption that is clearly too strong.

Guido

[Carl Schwamberger]

... Please note that everything I stated was in place before Italy entered the war. Without the war, production of the M38 series weapons (the M91/38 was the 6.5mm version), the M38 LMG, etc. likely would have continued. No reason to stop and the M91 series could be sold to other countries. The M47/32 c.c. was planned to replace all the 65mm infantry guns, the new artillery was coming off the production lines, M13/40s were in the works, etc.

...

Again I can't comment on the RM and RA, but the RE was on the road of reequipping/modernizing without any new wartime decisions.

So, how far might the army been reequipped with the new weapons? I only thought to look ahead 18 or 20 months. What could Italian industry accomplish in that time? Would that be a preperation period with a 'surge' of new arms later, or had the preperation been accomplished already?

[Sturmabteilungsmann]

The whole idea of a neutral Italy by the end of 1941... Mussolini is still Il Duce? Its far fetched, but I'll play.

I think the best Italy could hope for by the end of 1941 would be a military credible enough to:

1. Keep the allies from invading it as an anti-German base of operations.
2. Keep supplies flowing from Rome to its north African colonies.
3. Still make a contribution to operation Barbarossa similar to Spain's Blue Division(?)

All the above would be dependent upon Il Duce staying out of the Balkans. I think we are asking way to much of Benito in this thread.

[Carl Schwamberger]

...
All the above would be dependent upon Il Duce staying out of the Balkans. I think we are asking way to much of Benito in this thread.

Ya, left that one aside. It has been discussed elsewhere more than once & always comes down to Il Duce not being Il Duce through any of several PoD. My interest here is in the technical differences in the Italian military and their economic background without war for 18 or more months. Something that is seldom, if ever, addressed in any depth. A few remarks have collected here about new small arms and a better tank for the army, better engines for the airforce, better progress in naval construction (the aircraft carrier newer completion). Looking at the size of Italys industrial plant all that will be spread thin. Probablly only part of the army will see the new arms and the introduction of better powered aircraft limited to less than half the air force in any twelve month period.

[madmike61]

no, no change. The industry was exaclty the same, the Aquila, if completed as a ship, wasn't an operative aircraft carrier until 1946\46.

Italy was an agricoltural and poor nation: 2\3 years couldn't modify this status.