The Velvet Glove

To an historian, the inclusion of Italy among the major powers of Europe is problematic. Italy has never been a major power and the closest one can approach this is the Roman Empire.

 

OK, so that’s a fairly significant power!

 

Post-Rome, Italy was a divided, weak nation. This is not to say that the Italian states didn’t have influence – they did. That influence, however, was built on economic power or religious authority rather than political or military power.

 

Italy was unified in 1861. In the centuries after the fall of the Western Roman empire Italian states were in direct competition with each other and often dominated by foreign powers – Germany (via the Holy Roman Empire), Spain, France or the Habsburg Empire. Even after unification, Italy was dominated by her neighbours. She tied herself into Bismarck’s web of alliances, being brought into the Triple Alliance (Germany, Austria-Hungary and Italy) but never fully committing to it. Indeed, come the start of WWI, Italy did not jump into the conflict with her German-speaking allies and Turkey but stayed on the outside, being eventually wooed by the Triple Entente of England, France and Russia.

 

Italy’s strength in the years leading to WWI was in the Mediterranean. This was principally because she had no competitors in the eastern Med. Austria-Hungary had limited maritime influence and the Ottomans were more concerned with their traditional enemy in the north, Russia.

 

Yet Italy did have influence… and designs to expand that influence. She was eager to gain land from Austria-Hungary alone the eastern Adriatic coast. And, of course, she had interests in northern Africa east of the French bloc of colonies.

 

This, then, brings us to the first lesson for a player who has the dubious joy of drawing Italy: control the Med. The main competitors are France in the west and Turkey in the east; Austria, whilst starting with a fleet, is less of a maritime rival. What an Italian has to achieve, then, is peace with France and management of Turkey.

 

Peace with France shouldn’t be too much of a problem. France should be more interested in to her north, west and east. She has easy SCs in Iberia and has a more threatening pair of neighbours in England and Germany.

 

Compared to these two rivals, the threat of Italy is limited. Italy has one immediate route to France through Piedmont.

 

To draw on the greatest power to emerge from Italy, Rome, Gaul (France) came to the Empire relatively late. This should be a hint: Italian interests are to maintain peace with France while she takes more interest to her east. It should also be remembered that after Rome, Italy never gained any French territory. In Dip, Italy needs to be able to control the whole of the Med’s SCs if she is to succeed but those in the French sphere should be later targets.

 

Turkey is more problematic. Turkey is probably Italy’s main rival at sea in the early game. Turkey has only a limited choice of directions and, come later in the game, an initially successful Turkey will only build on that success by expanding through the Mediterranean.

 

Whether Italy can afford to take on Turkey immediately will depend on her strategic position in relation to alliances. It is, therefore, possibly best to manage Turkey’s power through diplomacy with Russia and Austria.

 

The lasting impact of the Roman Empire was the eastern Empire, later known as the Byzantine Empire, which controlled Turkey’s geographical location. This was achieved through the division of the peoples of the region (as was all of Rome’s success) as well as Italian dominance of the eastern Med.

 

With this in mind, then, Italy has natural targets in Tunis, Greece and Austrian SCs. The safe build is Tunis. Greece should probably only be attempted with solid support from Austria.

 

We can also take some lesson from the success of Venice, an Italian state which did manage to achieve some significant influence during the period of Italian disunity. This was achieved and maintained principally through trade. In Diplomacy, where there is no real equivalent to this, it translates to effective diplomacy.

 

Venice’s strength was because she made herself a maritime power to protect her trade routes. Whilst she traded around the region, Venice is notable in that she had fairly solid trade agreements with the Ottomans. Perhaps surprising given the Papacy’s attitude towards the Islamic state!

 

So, to achieve some success, Italy needs to be controlled by an effective negotiator. She needs peace with France, Austria and Turkey, or, at minimum, two of the three. She needs to make sure France is more concerned with the Low Countries and the north; she needs to use Russia and Turkey to limit Austrian strength and/or use Russia and Austria-Hungary to limit Turkish strength. Ideally, though, to achieve real success, she needs to neutralise the threat from all three of her eastern competitors. Not easy – which explains Italy’s comparative poor success rate.

 

This is the second lesson from Italian history: managing the potential of other powers. As is common to almost all powers in Dip, doing everything to limit the threat from 

 

 

other powers is key, especially so for the three central powers.

Italy needs to keep Turkey boxed in. She needs to crawl her way through Austria-Hungary. She needs to gain support from Russia but ensure Russian units in the south are limited by Austrian and Turkish units that the Saxon duo in the north – England and Germany – limit Russian expansion in the north.

 

In the south, Italy can gain up to 16 SCs: The Italian SCs (3), Austrian SCs (3), Turkish SCs (3), Balkan SCs (4), Tunis, Marseilles and Spain (3). This leaves her 2 short. So, where do the other two SCs come from?

 

There are a number of options: Munich and Sevastopol are the more likely (in fact, Sevastopol may need to fall before Italy can gain Ankara).   Portugal is a possibility but is much more defensible than the others.  Warsaw and Moscow are possibilities. The question is: when does Italy turn her attention, on the board, to the north?

 

Lesson 3: Don’t head north! Rome never brought the north of Europe under its control. Yes, she controlled most of Britain, but this was through Gaul. It is possible for Italy to find success throughout France (bringing Portugal, Brest and Paris within her reach) but unlikely. For France to be that vulnerable, England or Germany will be strong and provide an effective barrier. Italy should therefore concentrate on securing her western empire by limiting her western expansion and defending it.

 

This leaves Germany and northern Russia. Germany a continual thorn in Rome’s side. Throughout the centuries of Roman power, Germany was never under control. Indeed, German raiders sacked Rome on a comparatively regular basis! The solution for Rome – and for Italy – is to keep Germany neutral as long as possible. When Italy moves through Austria-Hungary, she removes Germany’s security. She, then, has to replace Germany’s reliance on Austria with a solid reliance on Italy.

 

But that doesn’t solve the problem of Munich. Munich is an SC which almost every power requires to achieve a solo. Italy is very likely to have to take it. The question is: When?

 

The answer is probably at late as possible. Being in Munich too early is likely to set every other power against Italy. The only exception is if Italy and France work together early in the game and Munich is taken to support France’s campaign against Germany. Even then, France will be looking for the chance to capture it herself.

 

If we are to take a lesson from Italian history, then, it is that Germany needs to be onside. Only when Italy is secure should she consider grasping after Munich.

 

Even then, perhaps Russian SCs are more achievable. Assuming an Italy that has established control of Austria-Hungary (perhaps Trieste and Budapest) and she has successfully, with Russian support, kept Turkey bottled up and taken Greece, Serbia, Constantinople and Smyrna, Italy is certainly better targeting Russian-held SCs: Vienna, Bulgaria, Rumania and Ankara.

 

The advantage of this is that an Italian strike against Russia can cut Russian southern units (in Bulgaria and Ankara) off from her northern units. If Vienna, Rumania and Sevastopol can be taken, this will be successful.

 

This leaves Italy in reach of Warsaw and Moscow (as well as Munich). But this is a long way down the line.

 

Roman power came from her unity compared to the disunity of the surrounding ‘nations’. Italian influence in the Middle Ages and Renaissance came from diplomatic and trade power.  Roman and – post-unification – Italian security was based on managing the effectiveness of northern rivals or maintaining peaceful relations, and dominating the Mediterranean.

 

Italy, therefore, should keep these lessons in mind. Diplomacy isn’t the same as history but the lessons of the periods of Roman and (comparative) Italian strength give a good indication of how to succeed with Italy.