Why didn’t Ireland join WW2?

[walleye26]

Not sure if this is the right place for this thread, but I have a burning question: Why did Ireland stay neutral during WW2? Besides the Fascist nations of Spain and Italy, all of Europe hated Hitler. Why didn’t Ireland align itself with the Allies to fight the Nazis? I mean, almost all of Europe (Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, France, Great Britain, etc) all fought against the Germans. Why not Ireland?

[Green Line]

The Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, and most other European nations only joined because they were invaded first.  Ireland was never invaded.  Why would they voluntarily join the most deadly war in the history of mankind, much less on the side of their recent colonial oppressor.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Not sure if this is the right place for this thread, but I have a burning question: Why did Ireland stay neutral during WW2? Besides the Fascist nations of Spain and Italy, all of Europe hated Hitler. Why didn’t Ireland align itself with the Allies to fight the Nazis? I mean, almost all of Europe (Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, France, Great Britain, etc) all fought against the Germans. Why not Ireland?

Many of the nations you mentioned (Netherlands/Belgium/Norway) only fought because they were attacked first. They tried to stay neutral. Germany was bound to come into conflict with them in a war with Britain, it became Hitler's goal to expel British troops from continental Europe. Hitler occupied the neutral nations to prevent allied troops from ever landing there, similarly he only invaded Greece to expel British troops, not to help Mussolini. Ireland was not in continental Europe and had the advantage of being west of Britain, so it was not caught up in the middle of the UK/German conflict.

Also, when Hitler died the Irish PM signed the condolence book and was heavily criticized. He wrote a letter to Britain saying something along the lines of "Imagine of Hitler had taken a vital strip of England", which showed that resentment over Northern Ireland played a role in Ireland's neutrality.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

It's a historiographical mistake to start from the assumption that the Irish government in the 30s and 40s wasn't at least vaguely fascism-curious.

[brucejoel99]

Because they - with the exception of a few minor incidents - weren't attacked, had nothing to potentially gain by doing so (&, indeed, saw a potential short-term gain of Irish reunification in the event of an Axis win, though the long-term pain that would obviously arise from an Axis win is another matter), & still hated the British to such an extent that they certainly weren't all that inclined to help them out in such a significant fashion.

[Hnv1]

Wasn’t there a LIC across the NI border throughout WW2? And Ireland had quite close kinship to the softer conservative strains of fascism especially the blue shirts in FG

[CumbrianLefty]

Well its true that de Valera wasn't a ferocious opponent of at least "soft" fascism, sure.

(his admiration for Salazar's regime especially was a matter of record)

But perhaps the RoI's practical neutrality shouldn't be overstated - British planes were allowed into their airspace on a regular basis, and our troops that found themselves there for varying reasons had an agreement to be permitted to enter NI and then back to Britain (whereas Axis personnel who had done similarly were usually interned until the end of the war)

Nazis bombed Dublin on at least one occasion - officially a "genuine mistake" but almost certainly in reality a coded warning to at least stay officially neutral.

And of course quite a few Irish volunteered to fight fascism.

[Silent Hunter]

Wasn’t there a LIC across the NI border throughout WW2? And Ireland had quite close kinship to the softer conservative strains of fascism especially the blue shirts in FG

LIC?

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Belgium wanted to stay neutral, especially our king at the time wanted to. King Leopold III is widely considered to be a coward (and he still has a worser reputation than Leopold II for some reason).

Belgium had the "Royal Question", which almost led to the collapse of Belgium and the formation of two separate states (Flanders and Wallonia), and i'm not sure if such a separation wouldn't have been violent esp. considering for the time being.

They held a referendum whether King Leopold III was allowed to return. Some regions (mostly Flanders and the more christian areas of Wallonia) voted in favour. Other regions (the cities and the socialist / poorer regions) voted against. The communists at the time (who were at the time a force to be reckoned with in Belgium) were strongly against his return and the monarchy. The chairman of the communists got murdered by royalists.

Lots of Belgian historicians said Belgium was at the brink of a civil war at the time. Leopold III was able to return, but since a large proportion of the Belgian electorate was against his return, he voluntarily stepped down and Baudouin was sworn is as king, to lower tensions in the country. If Leopold III hadn't done that, there might've been a civil war in Belgium.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Question

In 1949, the FGTB–ABVV voted a special budget of ten million Belgian francs to establish a Committee of Common Action (Comité d'action commune) aimed at supporting strike action taken in event of the King's return. The union took the lead in the opposition which emerged in the summer of 1950. André Renard, a Walloon trade union leader, called for "insurrection" and "revolution" in the newspaper La Wallonie shortly after the King's return in July 1950.[43] Modern historians have noted that "the smell of revolution was on the air" as Walloon nationalists called for the immediate secession of Wallonia and the creation of a republic.[44]

The general strike of 1950 began in the coal mining centres of Hainaut and quickly spread. Workers were soon on strike across Wallonia, Brussels, and, to a lesser extent, Flanders. The port of Antwerp was one of the key sites affected and the country was virtually paralysed.[43] On 30 July, four workers were shot dead by the Gendarmerie at Grâce-Berleur, near Liège and the violence intensified.[45][46] Staunch Leopoldists in the Government called for a stronger stance but found themselves in a minority, even in the PSC–CVP. Frustrated at the lack of progress, the Government threatened to resign en masse.[44]

As the situation escalated, the National Confederation of Political Prisoners and their Dependents (Confédération nationale des prisonniers politiques et des ayants droit, Nationale Confederatie van Politieke Gevangenen en Rechthebbenden, or CNPPA–NCPGR), the organisation representing political prisoners detained during the German occupation, offered to act as intermediaries between the different parties because of their respected status.[47] The CNPPA–NCPGR succeeded in persuading both the King and the Government to reopen negotiations which resumed on 31 July. In the afternoon on 1 August, Leopold publicly announced his intention to abdicate in favour of his eldest son, Baudouin, to avoid further bloodshed.[44] Baudouin, at the age of 19, became regent, with the title of "prince royal" on 11 August 1950.

[Hnv1]

Wasn’t there a LIC across the NI border throughout WW2? And Ireland had quite close kinship to the softer conservative strains of fascism especially the blue shirts in FG

LIC?

Low intensity conflict. I read years ago that for a lot of American troops, the NI border was the first time they saw action

[jaymichaud]

It's a historiographical mistake to start from the assumption that the Irish government in the 30s and 40s wasn't at least vaguely fascism-curious.

Wasn't that Fine Gael/Blueshirts and not Fianna Fáil, though?

[Beet]

I don't know, why didn't Spain join the war on the side of the Axis? There's no point in getting dragged into someone else's war if you don't have to, especially one as destructive as WW2.

[walleye26]

I don't know, why didn't Spain join the war on the side of the Axis? There's no point in getting dragged into someone else's war if you don't have to, especially one as destructive as WW2.

Spain had just gone through a brutal civil war and didn’t have the ability to, if I remember correctly.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

It's a historiographical mistake to start from the assumption that the Irish government in the 30s and 40s wasn't at least vaguely fascism-curious.

Wasn't that Fine Gael/Blueshirts and not Fianna Fáil, though?

The explicitly fascist Blueshirts ended up folding into FG, yes, but FF had right-wing authoritarian impulses as well in the early days. The main difference was that Dev's instincts were, as said up-thread, more along the lines of Salazar's parafascist Catholic conservatism than the totalitarian "fascism proper" of Italy and Germany. (Although, to give the devil his due, it should be noted that Salazar himself, while technically neutral in the war, leaned towards the Allies in the same sense that Franco leaned towards the Axis.)

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

The British were the old colonial masters, Ireland had only recently won it's independence. There was too much bad blood between the two countries.

[TDAS04]

The Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, and most other European nations only joined because they were invaded first.  Ireland was never invaded.  Why would they voluntarily join the most deadly war in the history of mankind, much less on the side of their recent colonial oppressor.

Also why Sweden stayed neutral.  They weren’t attacked by the Nazis.  Denmark and Norway were.

[Samof94]

Because they - with the exception of a few minor incidents - weren't attacked, had nothing to potentially gain by doing so (&, indeed, saw a potential short-term gain of Irish reunification in the event of an Axis win, though the long-term pain that would obviously arise from an Axis win is another matter), & still hated the British to such an extent that they certainly weren't all that inclined to help them out in such a significant fashion.

They did nominally work with them a bit towards the end. Kind of like Spain on the Axis side.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

It's a historiographical mistake to start from the assumption that the Irish government in the 30s and 40s wasn't at least vaguely fascism-curious.

Wasn't that Fine Gael/Blueshirts and not Fianna Fáil, though?

FG were a weird party in the first few years of its existence, intended to be a coalition of everyone who opposed De Valera's populist republicanism. Deputy leader James Dillon of the liberal wing of the party resigned in 1942 over FG's refusal to advocate joining the Allies!

[Calthrina950]

Because they - with the exception of a few minor incidents - weren't attacked, had nothing to potentially gain by doing so (&, indeed, saw a potential short-term gain of Irish reunification in the event of an Axis win, though the long-term pain that would obviously arise from an Axis win is another matter), & still hated the British to such an extent that they certainly weren't all that inclined to help them out in such a significant fashion.

They did nominally work with them a bit towards the end. Kind of like Spain on the Axis side.

Hitler, from what I understand, tried to get Franco to enter the war on the Axis side, intending to use Spain as a springboard from which to invade and seize Gibraltar, which was a lifeline of the British Empire and would have cut off British access to the Mediterranean and the vitally important Suez Canal. Franco, however, resisted his pleas, and a conference between them was a failure. Consequently, Spain remained neutral throughout World War II.

I also read somewhere that the Nazis had contingency plans to invade Switzerland, which were obviously never acted upon. Moreover, they occupied Norway so as to secure control of ores imports from Sweden, which were vital to the German war effort.

[Samof94]

Because they - with the exception of a few minor incidents - weren't attacked, had nothing to potentially gain by doing so (&, indeed, saw a potential short-term gain of Irish reunification in the event of an Axis win, though the long-term pain that would obviously arise from an Axis win is another matter), & still hated the British to such an extent that they certainly weren't all that inclined to help them out in such a significant fashion.

They did nominally work with them a bit towards the end. Kind of like Spain on the Axis side.

Hitler, from what I understand, tried to get Franco to enter the war on the Axis side, intending to use Spain as a springboard from which to invade and seize Gibraltar, which was a lifeline of the British Empire and would have cut off British access to the Mediterranean and the vitally important Suez Canal. Franco, however, resisted his pleas, and a conference between them was a failure. Consequently, Spain remained neutral throughout World War II.

I also read somewhere that the Nazis had contingency plans to invade Switzerland, which were obviously never acted upon. Moreover, they occupied Norway so as to secure control of ores imports from Sweden, which were vital to the German war effort.

Franco had completely different goals than Hitler and was more of a Catholic ultra conservative with his goals mostly set on “make Spain great again”.  The Blue Division did exist which was an pro axis group of volunteer solders.

[lfromnj]

It's a historiographical mistake to start from the assumption that the Irish government in the 30s and 40s wasn't at least vaguely fascism-curious.

Yeah De Valera giving condolences On Hitler's death in 1945 although correct from a true neutrality point of view was pretty curious.

[lfromnj]

I don't know, why didn't Spain join the war on the side of the Axis? There's no point in getting dragged into someone else's war if you don't have to, especially one as destructive as WW2.

Spain had just gone through a brutal civil war and didn’t have the ability to, if I remember correctly.

Another factor was unlike the clean Wehrmacht which is a total myth, the German intelligence service was actually headed by a true clean dude named Wilhem Canaris. Canaris was anti Nazi  after only a few years of Nazi rule and one of his given tasks was to negotiate with Franco to join the war. Instead he did the opposite . Its so sad the brutal Nazi Romney is romanticized ala Lost cause style but Canaris gets no recognition .

[NewYorkExpress]

It's more likely that Ireland would have joined Hitler than sided with the Allies if they were to pick a side.

They didn't because they thought staying Neutral would benefit them more.

[Alben Barkley]

It's more likely that Ireland would have joined Hitler than sided with the Allies if they were to pick a side.

They didn't because they thought staying Neutral would benefit them more.

If the Irish joined the Axis, they would have been utterly annihilated by the British basically immediately. Their only recently won independence would be gone forever. They understood this and were not stupid enough to risk that, nor did they have any reason to trust or side with Hitler. There was never any chance of that happening. Despite their official neutrality, they allowed the Allies to use their airspace, shared intelligence with the Allies, and over 50,000 Irishmen voluntarily fought for the British.

[Coldstream]

The Irish *government* didn’t really see a difference morally between the British and the Nazis.

But plenty of Irish citizens volunteered for the allies. It’d be a mistake to think the Irish people’s sympathy was with the Nazis.