Of lost monkeys and broken vehicles

[Serpent]

This is a very interesting proposal that I have to admit I wasn't very familiar with, but

On fever, thanks 5th dose! But to get on the partition of Algeria. First two obvious issues.

1. How does the partitioned French Algeria stay viable economically? From memory and older discussions with @David T the economy of the colonate was primarily agricultural and dependent on cheap Algerian labour. How do you get said cheap labour post partition? Ok you have resettled the Harkis to French Algeria, who I would doubt that after fighting for France would care any about being second class citizens. So you do what? Allow large scale immigration across the border end up with banlieurs in Oran... and an ongoing insurgency it the partitioned Algeria? Have a hard border... and let the Pied Noir economy tank?

I mean, anything better than departing the territory altogether would be better for the Pied-Noirs, given that in IOTL they had to depart Algeria, leaving their immovable belongings behind and starting anew in France. As for the total state of the French Algerian economy in such a scenario, more on that right below.

2. Where's the viable border of partitioned French Algeria? One that's simultaneously not full of hostile Algerians, at least somewhat economically viable and for good measure defendable against the inevitably hostile Algeria which the Soviets will be all that happy in arming?

Here can be found the maps of the multiple Peyrefitte options.

By taking a good look at that article you've posted, I've come upon some ideas, revolving around the establishment of an independent state of Kabylia for the Kabyle (Berber) people, as well as an independent state of Azawagh for the Touareg people in Sahara.

This envisioned "balkanization" strategy for Algeria should happen in addition to the "Israelization" of French Algeria, intending both to weaken the FLN, (by dividing the Algerian people over ethnic lines), as well as to establish reliable partners/allies that France can work with.

Both these people, the Kabyle and Touareg respectively, requested their independence prior to Algeria's independence from the French authorities and were in favor of achieving their independence for their own people in their majority, but were promptly ignored by the colonial authorities in Paris.

And without the Setif and Guelma massacres, their opinion of France would remain positive enough to ensure the future partnership between their people and France, as they won't rally behind the FLN for sure that is.

As for the Touareg people, given that the lands inhabited by their people extend far beyond just Algeria, as well as the fact that their inherently tribal/nomadic lifestyle would in turn result in a very unstable state, marred by constant disagreements between the various different tribes, somewhat similar to the issues an independent Kurdistan would face, they would need a major power backing them, if they wish to maintain the vast amounts of sparsely populated lands they reside at, for all of their neighbours that believe they have a claim to them.

Now, just to be clear here, I don't expect French troops to patrol all the Sahara or something, only for France to play strongman politics and support their preferred candidate to rule over the Touareg people, in addition to maintaining (by lease) a few strategically located important (colonial era) military bases near the new Azawagh state's borders with their neighbouring states, after all France retained a significant presence IOTL in West Africa.

The benefits would be immense, whether fossil fuels, minerals and/or other resources, would be exported to France through French Algeria, at severely discounted prices, in exchange for the protection France would offer the Azawagh state.

French Algeria could even repurpose its economy to act as a processing hub for all those riches, ideally reaching the north African coastline via their Kabyle allies, or through a corridor (or several ones), whether fossil fuel, minerals or other resources, before shipping them to Metropolitan France, leading French Algeria's economy to thrive beyond the Pied-Noir's wildest dreams.

Now of course that would propably piss off many african states, (like Mali), but as they are merely French protectorate right now, and the independence of the Azawagh state would leave them without any significant resources in the aftermath, their opinions don't really matter.

One long term viable option, one of course that would need to go over the Pied Noirs dead bodies could be full integration, giving the native Algerian population full French citizenship. But how do you achieve that after 1945?

The French people over in Mainland France themselves were overwhelmingly opposed to such an action, so I doubt that this could possibly ever happen unfortunately. The Harkis and their families could easily be given the French citizenship though, given that they've fought and bled for France, French public opinion won't oppose that, on the contrary, they'd be in favor of such an action.

Anyhow, tbh I always thought quite sad how De Gaulle just dumped the Pied-Noirs, in my opinion it would be better if France had just abandoned the Pied-Noir on their own to fend off the FLN, with De Gaulle washing his hands like pontius pilate of this whole messy affair. I know the Pied-Noirs would have still lost to the FLN, that was inevitable, but at least they'd the chance to fight for their homes.

So I gotta wonder, with a far more powerful French Republic ITTL, the leadership of the Algiers putsch of 1961 could just as well go ahead and declare independence from France, if they feel like their coup attempt won't have the slightest chance to succeed over in Metropolitan France, (and of course given that majority French opinion was against continuing the conflict). Gotta wonder what would De Gaulle's reaction would be then. Would he just withdraw from Algeria the French forces, or would he move against the putsch makers...

 

[emperor joe]

So more than double in 80 years? If I remember correctly the population before the war was over 9 million close to 10, with the war casualties that would stunt growth till 1944 which could catch 10mill. Now they of course can go to 30mill yes but it will be a huge population boom. Don't get me wrong it would be good to reach 30mill I just think it unlikely.

Not really if Turkey can manage to increase its population by a factor of four i don't see why greece couldn't do it..i mean you haven't the poor economic conditions of otl..the political instability..the dearth of land... emigration..and ofcourse greece can ride the post war babyboom even better than in otl because you have a larger population.. let's not even mentioned the new populations liberated after the war rhodes and Constantinople..and hopefully Cyprus..and Cypriots at the time were having a larger TRF and a younger population at the time than greece.. combine this the rest of the other factors of the Greek population should explode... although is suspect that most of the growth will be in Macedonia,thrace and ionia if the 1940 census is an indicator of of the future

 

[goumaister]

Not really if Turkey can manage to increase its population by a factor of four i don't see why greece couldn't do it..i mean you haven't the poor economic conditions of otl..the political instability..the dearth of land... emigration..and ofcourse greece can ride the post war babyboom even better than in otl because you have a larger population.. let's not even mentioned the new populations liberated after the war rhodes and Constantinople..and hopefully Cyprus..and Cypriots at the time were having a larger TRF and a younger population at the time than greece.. combine this the rest of the other factors of the Greek population should explode... although is suspect that most of the growth will be in Macedonia,thrace and ionia if the 1940 census is an indicator of of the future

I won't disagree on the baby boom but I would have to point out that Greece both OTL and ITTL will be far more developed than Turkey OTL and with better education which most times indicates lowering of birthrates as women join the workforce and stop making so many babies. So a slowdown in the 90's is expected unlike OTL Turkey which is way less urbanized.

 

[Serpent]

I won't disagree on the baby boom but I would have to point out that Greece both OTL and ITTL will be far more developed than Turkey OTL and with better education which most times indicates lowering of birthrates as women join the workforce and stop making so many babies. So a slowdown in the 90's is expected unlike OTL Turkey which is way less urbanized.

Exactly what I've been saying at an earlier post, even more so prevalent in ITTL, as Turkey lacks industrialized areas far more so than IOTL, and most likely by the end of the war ITTL Turkey would have lost its last remaining somewhat industrialized areas, and in addition its richest provinces, Bithynia/Caria/Constantinople/Biga to Greece and Pontus to Armenia or Georgia, the USSR in general. So that leaves what? Attaleia and Kastamonu? Plus new waves of refugees means another generation of Turks would live in a state of poverty and be unable to properly attend school, especially beyond elementary school, as their hard pressed parents would need these kids more than ever to work the fields, given that they've lost everything (once again after being forced to relocate in 1922 the first time, for quite a lot of them).

So the Turkish literacy rates should be horrible ITTL, which should actually significantly strengthen ITTL Turkey's birth rates in the long term.

 

[goumaister]

Exactly what I've been saying at an earlier post, even more so prevalent in ITTL, as Turkey lacks industrialized areas far more so than IOTL, and most likely by the end of the war ITTL Turkey would have lost its last remaining somewhat industrialized areas, and in addition its richest provinces, Bithynia/Caria/Constantinople/Biga to Greece and Pontus to Armenia or Georgia, the USSR in general. So that leaves what? Attaleia and Kastamonu? Plus new waves of refugees means another generation of Turks would live in a state of poverty and be unable to properly attend school, especially beyond elementary school, as their hard pressed parents would need these kids more than ever to work the fields, given that they've lost everything (once again after being forced to relocate in 1922 the first time, for quite a lot of them).

So the Turkish literacy rates should be horrible ITTL, which should actually significantly strengthen ITTL Turkey's birth rates in the long term.

This Turkey growth could in theory be stopped by the splitting the nation between communist and capitalist. Per average the communist states had smaller average growth. Also bigger emigration to other states could hamper it as well as smaller initial population base .Not by a lot admittedly

 

[emperor joe]

This Turkey growth could in theory be stopped by the splitting the nation between communist and capitalist. Per average the communist states had smaller average growth. Also bigger emigration to other states could hamper it as well as smaller initial population base .Not by a lot admittedly

Yes i guess that turks would migrate in large numbers to the Soviet union/and or Germany depending of the situation after the war... interesting enough during the white Australia policy turks weren't allowed to migrate to Australia but Turkish Cypriot were... despite the fact that we on average are darker skinned that both the greek and Turkish mainlanders

 

[Serpent]

This Turkey growth could in theory be stopped by the splitting the nation between communist and capitalist. Per average the communist states had smaller average growth. Also bigger emigration to other states could hamper it as well as smaller initial population base .Not by a lot admittedly

A Western Turkish state that has been thoughrouly (forcefully) dekemalicized post WWII by the victorious allied powers, (similar to what happened to the defeated Germany), would not only have lower birth rates, due the the in depth liberalization of the Western Turkish state that the Western Allied powers would pursue in the event of dekemalicization, but would also lead to emigration of the Western Turkish populace to Western Europe, due to their worse economic position than IOTL, their ability to integrate into the Western European nations far more easily, since the Western Turkish society would have been liberalized, and the very much more likelier than IOTL possibility that a free movement agreement would be given by the Western European states to a liberalized Western Turkish state, whose population would be more than eager to immigrate into the Western European states, once allowed.

If all of the above prequisites are met, then ITTL Turkey's population could be substantially curbed.

 

[goumaister]

Snip

If on the other hand Turkey remains whole and isn't fully dekemalicized I would argue that it would follow the Arab states path but with no oil. Maybe have a series of wars with the Kurdish state, if one exists, which would be a drain on both human and material resources. There is a whole ocean of possibilities with really different Middle East ITTL to push the Turks on many different paths. I mean they still have the Caliphate I think that could play a role later.

 

[Lascaris]

Kharkov March 14th, 1943

The city fell again to the Germans. Manstain's counter-offensive had dealt a series of painful blows on the Soviets. But this time it could hardly compare to the disastrous defeats the Soviets had dealt on the Germans and their Allies over the previous months.

Athens, March 16th, 1943

Nikos Zachariadis did not show the slightest sign of nervousness as he entered the room together with Demetrios Glinos. Only Ion Dragoumis and George Kafandaris, the head of the Liberal party and vice-premier.

"Well?" Dragoumis only asked

"Why it's nice to meet you comrade prime minister"

"Mister prime minister. That clarified, Vermion"

"What about it? Comrade Makedon had to disarm groups of fascists and armed collaborators. He should be recommended for his actions."

"Do you think I'm an idiot? Oh I get it you think I'm just a well bred bourgeois idiot who's never been away from a salon. Back at the time you were born I was just chasing skirts in Athens." Glinos an old acquittance of Dragoumis visibly flinched. Zachariadis seemed unperturbed as Dragoumis continued.

"So let me tell you how it is going to be. The party will ensure that Klaras plays well with the other kids. Otherwise I will personally denounce Klaras publicly over the radio for a traitor who undermines the war effort. And the party alongside him. And crush Klaras and anyone that actually backs him up like a bug. We have a war to win and Huns to kill. This meeting is over"

Sardeis (Salihli), March 21st, 1943

Not unsurprisingly modern Greek maps called the city by its ancient name, not her Turkish one. For the soldiers of the US 34th Infantry division that had just taken the town it did not matter much. What mattered was that by now both they and the Greeks and the British were advancing at a reasonable rate while the Germans and the Turks while still by no means broken were not fighting for every single scrap of land as they had before the siege lines of Smyrna. Just the next day the Greeks would liberate Perhamos up north.

Epirus, March 22nd, 1943

The Greeks had been held before Ioannina through winter. But now just as further east the front further east on the Olympus was starting to liven up again the relative quiet of the Epirote front came to an end. Before the end of the month Ioannina would be liberated...

Mount Vermion, March 23rd, 1943

Stelios Sklavenas, cursed Mizerias as he was parachuted over the mountain. His companions, a small group of commandos of the 2nd Raider Regiment, propaganda was calling it the Sacred Band, took it in good stride. Well they should, they were not jumping into the middle of the night for the first time in their life after a crash course of a few days. But needs must. The last thing the central committee needed was for Ares to bring it to conflict with the government in the middle of war with the fascists. Particularly when any sane person recognised what would be the likely result of such conflict. And it would be a shame if all the good work Ares had done went to waste...

Arakan, March 25th, 1943

Bernard Montgomery ordered a halt to the offensive in Arakan. His forces had managed to take the small port of Maungdaw and push forward in the Mayu range but the attack had run out of steam in the face of growing Japanese resistance well away from Akyab island which Auchinleck hoped to see captured. Recriminations between Auchinlek on one side and Alexander and Mongomery on the other would follow...

Philadelpheia (Alasehir), March 26th, 1943

The allied advance came to a halt to the east of the town. Over the past six weeks Allied forces had broken the siege of Smyrna and advanced over 140km from the city liberating most of Asiatic Greece and inflicting nearly 80,000 casualties on the Turks and Germans, most of them infantry units cut off when Allied armour had broken out of the Smyrna perimeter. But they had lost over 21,000 men and 340 tanks doing and by now their advance was starting to run out of steam between German reinforcements and a worsening supply situation the further they went from the port of Smyrna. Besides it was time to withdraw the US divisions that had participated in the offensive. Back at Casablanca the Americans had agreed to commit their forces in the Mediterranean to the Greek front during the first months of 1943 instead of letting them sit idle in North Africa. But but this would not come at the cost of the strategy agreed upon at Casablanca, despite Churchill's proposals to the contrary...

 

[Batman16]

Greece on the Move! Recapturing Ioannina in Epirus paves the way for further assaults north back into Northern Epirus like Saranda or Agrykastro. The drive out of Smyrna is running out of steam but probably a good place to end it; recapturing most of Asiatic Greece is about as far as the US is willing to go, inflicting approximately 4:1 causalities. I'm curious how this would leave a potential drive into Bithynia and seizure of the Northern Aegean, the Soviets could use the extra supplies. Turkey has to be running out of steam soon I'd think just in terms of matieral losses. Love it as always and can't wait to see what's next.

 

[goumaister]

Well now I'm worried that the withdrawal of the Americans, and some British I would guess, will leave the Asiatic front vulnerable to counterattacks by the Turks and Germans. On than front what happened on the other sides of Turkey? Have those fronts reignited?
Let's hope Ares will yield to the government and not keep pushing.
Now we wait till the Italians withdraw from the war and what the consequences will be.

 

[emperor joe]

I don't think that the axis Will be in a position to attack the asia minor fronts..the lack of supplies applies to both sides..and the Turks can't make good the theirs losses in equipment

 

[Aristomenes]

I think the Turks will try to counterattack, however the results will be meagre. @Lascaris I imagine that the Axis units participating in the Smyrna siege have lost their heavy equipment during the Allied breakthrough.
The breakthrough in the Epirus front has the potential to trap Axis units, if the attack is directed towards Western Macedonia
I hope Ares will behave, he is not one of my favorites (far from it), but I would be sorry to see him losing his head ITTL as IOTL.
As an afterthought, I would love to see a meeting between Stalin and Dragoumis (and Churchill laughing in the background...)

 

[Lascaris]

Greece on the Move! Recapturing Ioannina in Epirus paves the way for further assaults north back into Northern Epirus like Saranda or Agrykastro.

The Greeks have an obvious objective there, namely liberating their territory. That said this is a backwater of a backwater in terms of the general war...

The drive out of Smyrna is running out of steam but probably a good place to end it; recapturing most of Asiatic Greece is about as far as the US is willing to go, inflicting approximately 4:1 causalities. I'm curious how this would leave a potential drive into Bithynia and seizure of the Northern Aegean, the Soviets could use the extra supplies. Turkey has to be running out of steam soon I'd think just in terms of matieral losses.

Turkey is receiving a steady stream of German war material, not as much as it would had liked, but still more than what the Romanians were getting. Granted a lot of this comes at the cost of the Bulgarians, much of the "Barbara" supply program of OTL is ending up in Turkey TTL.

Well now I'm worried that the withdrawal of the Americans, and some British I would guess, will leave the Asiatic front vulnerable to counterattacks by the Turks and Germans. On than front what happened on the other sides of Turkey? Have those fronts reignited?

Steady attrition it happening both in the south and in the Caucasus but no major offensive has taken place in either. The Soviets and Iranians would likely need to be considerably reinforced, to launch a major offensive. For the British and French in the south, most supplies to the Eastern Mediterranean have to either get produced locally or go around Africa. Providing the logistics for simultaneous offensives in Greece and the Middle East would be problematic.

Let's hope Ares will yield to the government and not keep pushing.
Now we wait till the Italians withdraw from the war and what the consequences will be.

He was subject to party discipline and the party is not happy...

I think the Turks will try to counterattack, however the results will be meagre. @Lascaris I imagine that the Axis units participating in the Smyrna siege have lost their heavy equipment during the Allied breakthrough.

Not necessarily. Turkish and German units, the ones that successfully pulled back retreated in relatively good order. By this point you can probably reasonably distinct between first line units in the Turkish army that are armed close to German standards and second line units that are way more deficient in heavy weapons and artillery. The Western Turkish front, being mostly static since early 1942 start out the offensive with rather more second line units than the other fronts and these suffered the heaviest casualties.

The breakthrough in the Epirus front has the potential to trap Axis units, if the attack is directed towards Western Macedonia

It's not going fast enough for this nor are the forces there big enough. We are talking roughly 100,000 men on either side with the Greeks having slight numerical superiority over the Italians.

I hope Ares will behave, he is not one of my favorites (far from it), but I would be sorry to see him losing his head ITTL as IOTL.
As an afterthought, I would love to see a meeting between Stalin and Dragoumis (and Churchill laughing in the background...)

Dragoumis in his last writings before his death was... fairly sympathetic to the communists and on good terms with them. He was even talking to Giannis Kordatos KKE's first general secretary. So I'm not entirely certain how much Churchill would be laughing in the background...

 

[Sphenodon]

Yes and spent all of the political capital that Greece has bled for, over the patch of land that is Cyprus, to acquire it from an ALLY, which would prove much much much more difficult than acquiring land from a defeated enemy power, leaving Turks and Bulgarians to celebrate the idiocy of Greek diplomacy, for with this blunder they'd literally alienate their Franco-British allies, which, in the near east, post Suez, still yield MORE power/have more of a say in regards to the future of the region, than the USA could realistically yield. In essence sacrifice all the other Greek territorial claims (Constantinople, Biga, Bythinia, Caria, Rhodope mountains strategic borderline passages etc), in exchange for just Cyprus... You seem to forget that decolonization by the end of WWII is not a given, at the end of WWII we're still a decade and a half away from decolonization occuring over the globe.

This feels like a misread on how the diplomacy surrounding a Greek acquisition of Cyprus postwar would look in the eyes of the Brits. The UK is definitely going to want ample power projection in the eastern Mediterranean near Suez, certainly; by the same venture, compared to OTL there is not only Turkish insurgency in Cyprus, but a far more powerful and more importantly competent Greek state in the region serving as a British ally. Even if we assume that Greek national forces aren't involved in putting down the Cypriote violence (I suspect they will be in time, though maybe the UK will keep it from happening due to leeriness over losing control there), it's going to be a lot easier of a thing to convince Whitehall of to transfer Cyprus to a secure British ally that has proven itself uniquely capable out of those in continental Europe of withstanding enemy conquest, than to do so for a country that in our history was in a civil war during the post-WWII peace conferences being hashed out.

As pointed out by others, it's also very much possible for the UK itself to retain military projection from Cyprus by leasing or retaining naval bases from Greece, in the process losing negligible material benefit from actually controlling the island (depending on the nature of British administration of Cyprus, possibly even removing an administrative and financial sink) while smoothing over a point of contention with Athens, and indeed doing more to ensure their future cooperation. Even outside of those precise implications, countries giving away colonies in exchange for wartime support is by no means unheard of. The UK itself did it for Italy in exchange for their joining of the Entente forces in WWI, though granted the cession in question (Jubaland) was basically peanuts compared to turf gained from enemies. That said, given that formal Greek suzerainty over Constantinople is in question here, Cyprus might not honestly be that different of a fish.

Nevermind that the state of the Hellenic military would fall into decay sooner or later, with the Turks twice defeated, they'd stop being perceived as a real threat by the Greek political leadership, only to suddenly emerge as one such once again... Participating in foreign interventions will ensure not only that the Hellenic military is kept up to date, but also that it remained battle hardened and doesn't decay in the slightest, forced to constantly be on its feet, much like the modern day French military thanks to its multiple interventions in west Africa & elsewhere in the relatively recent past.

If we're being honest I think the threat of Turkish revanchism is always going to keep the Greeks on edge, to say nothing of being in the line of Moscow's sights for controlling the Dardanelles and Bosphorus Straits and (unless Bulgaria ends up under the umbrella of the Western sphere somehow, which given the presence of Allied forces in Greece isn't an impossibility) having the timeline's equivalent of the Warsaw Pact directly on their northern border. If they engage in any military support for British or French allies in the Middle East (should any remain in place) postwar, or indeed contribute forces in any support for said powers as part of an alliance, their sharpness will likewise remain supported. Contrasting that, unlike the French Greece has no hegemonic ambitions or indeed position in MENA (the most I can see is Greek Cyrenaica becoming a thing, which I'll touch on later and if it ends up happening would significantly change this condition) and would really serve more to damage its relationships with local actors through such interference than to benefit itself strategically.

Consider this: is the deployment of one regiment or brigade of the Greek army, and some naval support, liable to tip something like the Suez Crisis more in the favor of London than having Greece on hand as an allied but uninvolved presence to serve as a mediator between the parties later on? Will fighting in Egypt be of use to the Greek army compared with WWII in informing future involvements against Eastern Bloc or Turkish actors compared with the cost in blood and diplomatic stance in Egypt and the rest of the Arab world? Should push come to shove and Egypt fall under a nationalist administration akin to Nasser's, will having boots on the ground to evacuate Greeks be better or worse at securing their welfare and minimizing casualties than hashing out an agreement with them on paper?

Egypt would never expel the Copts on it's own, there isn't any reasoning for that unless Greece participates in the Suez intervention and enlists them in a substantial manner. The Greek people residing within Egypt are going to be deported no matter what, only this time, if Greece stays out of the whole affair, they might immigrate to Greece in larger numbers than IOTL, instead of the United States, taking into consideration ITTL Greece's better economy, better demographics, more available (arable) land, [...] considering that the deported Greeks immigrated to the US in search of economic opportunities, that ITTL they might just find closer to home.

Tying into the above - is the Aegyptiotes being pushed out of Egypt a certainty? It seems like some bleedout is likely to happen given that the flight of the mutamassirun seems to have been underway since independence, but I guess my question is whether Egyptian pan-Arabism is a certainty given how much has changed in the theater, or if different currents can take effect in the end.

One thing that I suppose could bring Greco-Egyptian relations to a boil if pan-Arabism does become the dominant player in their political scene is if the Greeks take/are awarded Cyrenaica from Italy postwar as a colony. That said, I think more focus would be invested in securing Balkan and Anatolian territorial cessions than a largely desert territory with minimal resources identified at this time; why funnel money and people into a strip of North African coastline rather than support rebuilding efforts in Ionia, Thrace, and Macedonia?

2. Where's the viable border of partitioned French Algeria? One that's simultaneously not full of hostile Algerians, at least somewhat economically viable and for good measure defendable against the inevitably hostile Algeria which the Soviets will be all that happy in arming?

Here can be found the maps of the multiple Peyrefitte options.

One long term viable option, one of course that would need to go over the Pied Noirs dead bodies could be full integration, giving the native Algerian population full French citizenship. But how do you achieve that after 1945?

Very interesting notions. I will go out on a limb and say that maybe the possibility of France integrating the native population isn't as impossible as OTL due to the colonies flipping to the Free French either immediately or a lot sooner (in the process introducing less draconian legislation to wheel back later and giving less time for the relations between Algerians and colons to decay further), but failing that I don't see the French keeping much more of anything than OTL.

 

[Serpent]

One thing that I suppose could bring Greco-Egyptian relations to a boil if pan-Arabism does become the dominant player in their political scene is if the Greeks take/are awarded Cyrenaica from Italy postwar as a colony.

Honestly, Cyrenaica is a money sinkhole, it would be useless as a colony, no arguing about that. But, there are other territories that a defeated Italy could yield to Greece, ones that would require minimal resources to upkeep, but greatly increase ITTL Greece's power projection in the Central Mediterranean basin.

The islands of Pantelleria, Lampedusa, Linosa & Lampione are an easily achievable yet worthwhile price, that Greece does not need sacrifice a lot of political capital post war to secure. Those islands have some 14.000 populace combined, so it would be pretty easy to circumvent self determination issues, in any case. Furthermore, Greece could even have a population exchange with Italy on a voluntary basis, welcoming all Griko people from Apulia, Calabria and Sicily, resettling them on the 4 aforementioned islands of Pantelleria, Lampedusa, Linosa & Lampione. Even though the Griko people number in the thousands, those 4 islands have more than ample space to resettle them, given their extremely low population density comparatively to the neighbouring island of Malta.

That said, I think more focus would be invested in securing Balkan and Anatolian territorial cessions than a largely desert territory with minimal resources identified at this time; why funnel money and people into a strip of North African coastline rather than support rebuilding efforts in Ionia, Thrace, and Macedonia?

That I agree, however by 1956 ITTL Greece should have realistically recovered from WWII and finished with reconstruction, assuming it doesn't get involved with colonial ventures etc.

 

[HerodotosofBerlin]

Honestly, Cyrenaica is a money sinkhole, it would be useless as a colony, no arguing about that. But, there are other territories that a defeated Italy could yield to Greece, ones that would require minimal resources to upkeep, but greatly increase ITTL Greece's power projection in the Central Mediterranean basin.

The islands of Pantelleria, Lampedusa, Linosa & Lampione are an easily achievable yet worthwhile price, that Greece does not need sacrifice a lot of political capital post war to secure. Those islands have some 14.000 populace combined, so it would be pretty easy to circumvent self determination issues, in any case. Furthermore, Greece could even have a population exchange with Italy on a voluntary basis, welcoming all Griko people from Apulia, Calabria and Sicily, resettling them on the 4 aforementioned islands of Pantelleria, Lampedusa, Linosa & Lampione. Even though the Griko people number in the thousands, those 4 islands have more than ample space to resettle them, given their extremely low population density comparatively to the neighbouring island of Malta.



That I agree, however by 1956 ITTL Greece should have realistically recovered from WWII and finished with reconstruction, assuming it doesn't get involved with colonial ventures etc.

thats a great idea

 

[Serpent]

thats a great idea

Yeah and ITTL Greece is blessed to have Ion Dragoumis as its Prime Minister, one of the very few Greek politicians with the foresight to truly comprehend the unique opportunity presented here for Greece, to acquire said islands, with all the advantages they would offer to Greece in the future, for little to no cost, political or otherwise, and resolve a longstanding issue with Italy at the same time, bringing the Griko compatriots back to the fold of their motherland in the process.

 

[Asriellian]

Idk, to me it seems kinda implausible that Greece would get/even want a group of random islands so close to Sicily and (relatively) far from Greece that they have absolutely 0 claim to. Plus I doubt the Griko population of Italy would want to move out of their homes in Calabria to some almost completely barren rocks 100's of miles from home and even further away from the Greek mainland.

 

[emperor joe]

Idk, to me it seems kinda implausible that Greece would get/even want a group of random islands so close to Sicily and (relatively) far from Greece that they have absolutely 0 claim to. Plus I doubt the Griko population of Italy would want to move out of their homes in Calabria to some almost completely barren rocks 100's of miles from home and even further away from the Greek mainland.

Exactly..not only that but it will strain the future italo-greco relations for no gain at all