The most important aspect of Hitler and Mussolini’s common ideology was their similar ambitious expansionist desire for living space and imperial aggrandisement. The first part of Mussolini’s expansionist plans was the Italian conquest of Abyssinia. His motives were partly internal; but there was also a powerful ideological incentive. This was Mussolini’s Fascist yearning for expansion and conquest relating to the Italian tradition of commitment to colonies; Mussolini was obsessed with the idea of reconstituting the Roman Empire. This is similar to the perpetuation of German expansionism as Hitler also wanted to continue earlier German policies. Therefore, it was partly the shared craving for expansion that drew Hitler and Mussolini together.
Throughout the 1930s Mussolini’s foreign policy became increasingly expansionist. His main aims related to countries surrounding Italy, such as Greece; Yugoslavia and Albania, which, if conquered would facilitate him to fulfil his desire of turning the Mediterranean into an ‘Italian lake’. He also had a desire to add to his colonies in Africa. Similarly, Hitler had very clear foreign policy aims. While he wanted to restore Germany’s borders lost in the 1919 Treaty; he also had much more ambitious aims, and looked towards Russia as part of his eastern expansion. Italy had also been humiliated after World War One, so similarly to Germany, was bound to make for a Nationalist foreign policy. Both countries had been deeply affected by the constraints of the Treaty of Versailles, so Mussolini saw the potential of a German alliance against Britain and France, in order to alter the treaty. A German alliance became increasingly attractive to Mussolini as Hitler boldly dismantled the settlement piece by piece. Therefore it is arguable that their expansionist and revisionist ideology brought Mussolini and Hitler together.
Mussolini and Hitler’s joint yearning for worldwide fascism also brought the leaders together; as they both believed that Europe’s future lay with Fascism, nationalism and right-wing militarism. Mussolini hoped to synchronize his own ideology with Hitler’s Nazism in order to produce a ‘century of Fascism’. The involvement in the Spanish Civil War was motivated partly by this ideology; both leaders shared an obsessive hatred of socialism, and Mussolini argued that he could not allow a Communist government to be formed in the Mediterranean. By helping Franco overrule the socialists in Spain; Hitler knew that it would mean the Soviet Union would loose Spain as a potential ally, and that the international political climate would be dominated by fascism. The outbreak of the Spanish Civil War further accelerated Italo-German rapprochement and Hitler not only saw the civil war as a means of testing his newly rearmed military and air force, but as a way to get closer to Italy. The outcome of the Spanish Civil War led to a major change in international relations: France and Britain drew closer together, and an alliance between these democracies and Italy was now made impossible. This consequently drove Italy closer to Germany.
To a certain extent, Mussolini’s desire to be on the winning side drew the two countries together. Mussolini was alarmed and surprised at Hitler’s move into the Rhineland but it reinforced his interest in a German alliance. Although Mussolini knew that Fascist ideology had created a common link between the two countries, he was more impressed by German power and wanted to be on the winning side in any future conflict. The Italian leader was captivated by Hitler’s fearless ambitious and ruthlessness, and held strong admiration for Nazi conduct of foreign policy. In Mussolini’s Rome-Berlin Axis speech in November 1936; he stated that ‘one great country has recently gathered a vast amount of sympathy among the Italian people; I speak of Germany.’ Compared with the feebleness of the West, Italy was very impressed by the power of Germany. The Spanish Civil War confirmed this weakness, as they adopted a policy of non-intervention. He wanted Italy to become more like Germany and less sympathetic in Europe. Mussolini wrongly concluded that Germany would be victorious in any forthcoming conflict and Italy would be able to share this victory if she remained an ally. Mussolini’s admiration for Hitler was not one-sided. Hitler often referred to the Italian leader as a ‘teacher of Fascism’. Both were very concerned with creating a good impression when either visited the other’s country. The leaders’ friendship is highly significant in the Italio-German alliance. What strengthened the tie towards the end of the 1930’s was the personal relationship that had developed between Hitler and Mussolini.
The fact that Germany and Italy were both Fascist dictatorships, and other countries such as France and Britain were democracies meant an alliance was even more likely. An alliance with a dictatorship was potentially more stable; the problem with an alliance with a democracy was that a change of government could lead to the alliance falling apart. France’s political system was forever changing, and the country saw a change of government four times in 1933. Another important point to consider relating to the democracies was that they were very against Italian expansionism. Britain and France had numerous colonies in Africa, but denied Mussolini Abyssinia. This consequently drew Germany and Italy closer together. Throughout this time period, Mussolini wavered between an alliance with Britain and France, and an alliance with Germany. He played the democracies off each other, in order to benefit his expansionist aims.
It should not be disputed that Mussolini and Hitler’s common ideology was a highly important part of the alliance between Italy and Germany. I would agree with the statement that it was the Fascist ideology that drew the two nations together into eventual alliance, as both leaders held many similar ideologues, such as expansionism, imperial aggrandisement and a hatred for socialism. However there were other extremely important factors that must be considered such as the military and political advantages for both countries, and the personal relationship between the two leaders. A shared ideology was singly very important, but alone it could not have drawn the countries together. No countries draw together based purely on common ideology, there must always be economic, military or foreign policy benefits.
