So, basically, assume Italy splits around the late 1940's between a pro-western monarchy in the south and a socialist but neutral (titoist-like?) state in the Padanian plain above the northern Appenines. Assuming the powers agree through a binding treaty that the former state can be a NATO member if it wants while the latter must not possess any Soviet troops in its territory, how would the lack of a western military presence in northern Italy and the Alpine chain affect NATO's military strategy and deployment in Europe?
How would an independent, neutral socialist Northern Italy affect NATO's defense strategy?
- Thread starter GauchoBadger
- Start date
This sounds fun. How was Austrian and Finnish neutrality maintained in the Cold War? The thing is besides Yugoslavia and I guess Albania later on there aren't many examples of neutral socialist states in Europe.
Honestly, I think this Northern Italy will the target of a lot of covert operation to try and subvert or overthrow the government and integrate it into the south, barring outright war. Unlike Yugoslavia, this government is in a vital strategic position straddling two NATO states and a government to its south claiming direct dominion of its territories. If it remains neutral, there’s really not much preventing every tool in the book being used to overturn the government there and bring it in line with the southern government.
Finland i guess was mostly safe as it wasn't too important for Soviet strategy, but Austria had its own independent military defense policy and industry as there was a legitimate threat of Soviet armies pulling a Schlieffen through its territory. Perhaps Northern Italy would adopt a similar policy?
Hey maybe since they're both neutral Padania and Austria can have its own bloc.
Would be funny if they get into conflict over Venice while the rest of Europe looks on in total awe.
Would be funny if they get into conflict over Venice while the rest of Europe looks on in total awe.