# data[].attributes.body
I think that the perspective that Mussolini had expansionist foreign policy aims best fits, and that he had always planned on using force to achieve these aims. Mussolini’s motives for expansion was very similar to Hitler’s, such as avenging previous ‘injustices’ and gaining economic benefits. This was clearly demonstrated in Italy’s invasion of Abyssinia- as Patricia Knight states in “Mussolini and Fascism”, the invasion was undertaken to “avenge Adowa, the scene of the disastrous defeat of Italian troops in 1896”, with further motives of the “prospect of economic gains in the form of oil, coal and gold”.

# data[].attributes.body
Mussolini’s foreign policy can be best characterized by the perspective that he aimed for aggressive expansion. According to Gooch, Mussolini once declared that “imperialism is the eternal and immutable law of life.” Furthermore, I believe that Mussolini utilized this goal as a propaganda strategy to draw in public support. This is shown in the Italian poster from May 1936, “Italy finally has its Empire.” The poster symbolizes the greatness of Mussolini’s success in imperializing Abyssinia and creating a Italian East African empire. This shows that Mussolini used his aggressive expansionist policies to gain popular support.

# data[].attributes.body
I most agree with German historian Gerhard Schreiber's perspective on Mussolini's foreign policy. In regards to his claim, I believe that Mussolini's central focus of foreign policy was to gain "domestic consensus" and add on to his propagandic aims. Although there are opinions that Italian foreign policy revolved around "expansionist goals" (AJP Taylor) and that Mussolini ultimately aimed for a War (Professor Gooch), it can be questioned if Mussolini actually had a plan in mind for the future of Italy. As the mentioned in Source C (pg. 153), Italy "lacked a strong economic base and well-equipped military forces." Therefore, it can be inferred that Mussolini's foreign policy leaned more towards developing a front to gain the support of his people.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with the perspective given by historian Gerhard Schreiber that though Mussolini had the motivation and the ambition to move his people, he just couldn't do it because the Italian military force was too weak. On the other hand, Nazi Germany had  both the military power and the patriotism to propel the foreign policies Hitler so desired.

# data[].attributes.body
I agr

# data[].attributes.body
We agree with historian Gerhard Schreiber's perspective on Mussolini's foreign policy was for socio-economic domestic policy. An evidence of this would be Source C on page 153 (MTGW) when the source states that "Mussolini lacked a strong economic base and well-equipped military forces, and the onset of the Depression made it even harder... arimed to seek glorious expansion on cheap possible expansion".

Another piece of evidence can be found on page 150 (MTGW) in the textbook's statement of "the country was war weary and could not afford to join a general European conflict". This shows that Italy was not in the circumstance to enter another war let alone try to expand without any economic gains from the war.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with the perspective that Mussolini had an ambition in his aggressive foreign policies but did not have the military and resources to fulfill its aggression. I also believe that Mussolini had guaranteed too much to his people if he weren't to do something it would lead to him being distrusted by the people.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree more with historian Gerhard Schreiber's perspective that Italy was fueled by socio-economic domestic policy than by his expansionist goals. I believe that Mussolini originally had some expansionist goals with his foreign policy in earlier years but, as evidenced by his forfeit of his foreign policy to Hitler in the Rome-Berlin Axis, they were not his primary goal. I think that more than anything Mussolini's foreign policy had a lack of general direction. Mussolini was eager to war with nations he knew he could defeat but when stronger nations such as France, Britain, or Germany got involved Mussolini was very reluctant to take action.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with the perspective stated by the historian Gehrand Schreiber, who argues that the foreign policy of Mussolini had propagandistic objectives and "was fuelled by socio ' economic factors". According to Gehrard, his main aim was to "reach domestic consensus", which he tried to do by fistering his own popular support. He tried to improve his image as a powerful leader by intervening in various wars, such as the intervention, which in mant cases were unsucessful (intervention in France). It is true that Mussolini had some expansionist goals since the beginning (Invasion of Abyssinia of of 1935 and the Spanish Civil War between 1936 and 1939), however, these wars turned out to be costly and inefficient. This is seen through his inability to join the war and the large list of supplies he needed to participate in WWII, which he provided to Hitler.

In addition, another perspective is the one explained by Prof. Gooch. He stated that Mussolini "was not a man without objectives" and he pursued his own strategy. Until the last moment, he tried to reach an agreement with Britain, under which he would support them, in exchange for concessions in the Mediterranean. This once more highlights the idea of Mussolini´s desire of strenghtning his image through expansion and "restoration of the Roman Empire". The problem was that Mussolini lacked resources for achieving this expansion and tried to reach agreements.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with the perspective of German historian Gerhard Schreiber, who claims that Mussolini’s foreign policy was more propaganda than genuine policy.

One source that provides evidence for this point of view is Source A on page 139. The Italian poster, from 1936 after the Abyssinian invasion, has the caption “Italy finally has its Empire” . The caption and the presentation of  a glowing Mussolini over the continent of Africa strongly glorifies Italy’s foreign policy actions. Thus, it is evidence that Italy was using foreign policy as a means of propaganda that highlighted Mussolini and his actions in government.

Another source that supports Schreiber’s perspective is the excerpt from Road to War: The Origins of World War ii (2009) by Richard Overy and Andrew Wheatcraft on page 149. This source discusses how one of Mussolini’s motivations for Albania was to “[match]” Germany, not because it was one of his own aims. The source additionally includes that Mussolini was affected by his pride, stating that “no doubt honor had to do with his decision” to sign the Pact of Steel.  Foreign policy in this situation was once again influenced by the people and their resentment at the time, rather than Mussolini’s actual wishes.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with British historian  AJP Taylor in that Mussolini had expansionist foreign policy goals. However, I also agree more with German historian Gerhard Schreiber in that these expansionist goals served as propaganda and that while Mussolini's goals of creating a Fascist empire were outlined, they were not specific enough to indicate that he truly had a clear strategy aligned to Nazi Germany (therefore in 1940, war for Italy was inevitable).

# data[].attributes.body
I personally agree with German historian Gerhard Schreiber and the fact that Mussolini used his foreign policy just to gain support and add to his propaganda. While it can be argued that he was eager for war (Prof. Gooch), it makes more sense to argue that it was more of a promise that he had to keep. Mussolini lacked clear aims behind his foreign policy, and the fact that he didn't have a solid military plan, modern artillery, and wasn't ready for war until 1940 show that he didn't really have a solid idea/plan for the future.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with the idea that Mussolini had a foreign policy but did not have a clear path to success as Hitler did. Mussolini wanted to achieve dominance in the mediterranean and to please the Italian population. The source from Robert Mallet, "Mussolini and the Origins of the
Second World War (1983)." supports this bysaying Italy invaded Albania because it supported their foreign policy aims while also wanting to take advantage of their strengthening relations with Great Britain. Due to the current situation, an opportunity presented itself. The source "Mussolini’s declaration of war on Britain and
France, June 1940." shows that he joined the war presumably to 'free the souls' of the Italian people by opening up the mediterranean. WW2 was an opportune moment for Mussolini and being an opportunistic leader as discussed before, he used the war and his alliance with Germany to attempt to further his foreign policy goals.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that much of Mussolini's foreign policy goals were fueled by socio-economic domestic policy, as suggested by Gerhard Schreiber. I also agree that it didn't seem like Mussolini had a clear plan in regards to foreign policy with Germany, seen by Mussolini attempting to have an alliance with Britain and France up until entering the war in 1940. I also agree with the part that Mussolini "was more a victim of his own public promises...". This was supported by the quote in the video where it was stated that Mussolini needed to exaggerate the position Italy's military was in to not support Hitler in 1939.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with the ideas of AJP Taylor and Renzo De Felice who both argued that Mussolini was attempting to play Germany against the UK and France in order to benefit from both sides through his foreign policy. I believe that this was demonstrated through his unwillingness to join World War II until it was clear that Germany was going to defeat France.

# data[].attributes.body
On the one hand,  it was evident that Mussolini was intentional in suspending a position in the war until 1940. Professor Gooch notes that Mussolini had a "very good idea of the array of German objectives" in the war, and used this to his advantage to be able to suspend war. On the other hand, however, Italy was and would be ill equipped to fight in the war due to the huge economic problems created by his small conquests in Africa. Furthermore, the time spent during this time of non-belligerence was not well spent as the attempts to  "play Germany and France off against each other" as AJP Taylor states failed as Hitler calls Italy out on their bluff, intending to achieve Anschluss with Austria.

# data[].attributes.body
After reading German historian Gerhard Schreiber, I too believe that Mussolini’s foreign policy to a certain extent was used for propaganda purposes, and his goal was to ‘gain domestic consensus’. His ego was lifted after winning multiple small wars, which eventually led him

# data[].attributes.body
I can agree with the perspective of historian AJP Taylor in the idea that Mussolini was expansionist but had conflicts with Hitler in Foreign Policy which stopped Italy from taking action early.  Like Professor Gooch mentions, "Mussolini wanted to go to war but was waiting on Hitler".
His expansionist mindset can be supported by the cartoon source of Hitler and Mussolini hanging clothes (the clothes representing territory) on the drying line while their expressionist and proximity suggest a tricky relationship. Secondly the perspective can be further supported by the cartoon of the Rome-Berlin Axes, the sharpness of the axes implying a militaristic tension between the two powers as to who would take action first, and who would gain more power.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that Mussolini had expansionist foreign policy goals but ran into conflicts of interest with Hitler (as the historian AJP Taylor states) . Mussolini always wanted Italy to have a grand empire that could rival the British and French empires. Not only would ruling over a large empire in Europe and Africa increase national prestige and domestic support, but it would provide the economic resources to create a strong Italian state.
However, an aggressive Hitler and weak Italian military often prevented Mussolini from embarking on his imperialist ambitions. Hitler and Mussolini often had conflicts of interest, and when Germany grew far more militarily and politically superior to Italy, Mussolini couldn't effectively advance his interests. A weak military and economy also limited Mussolini.

The historian Ruth Henig argues this point in her book The Origins of the Second World War  when she states that Mussolini had a public "ambition to raise Italy's status" as a major power in Europe when he ascended into power. However, Henig continues on to say that Italy lacked "a strong economic base" and a "well-equipped, effective" military.

A British political cartoon from the late 1930's also shows Mussolini and Hitler on the edge of a diving board into the sea of "war". While Hitler seems keen on diving head first, Mussolini is shown as hesitant or even nervous, representing the two Fascist leaders' conflicting views on war. Italy could not match the industrial and military might of Germany, and was made second to its power. Mussolini, while desiring the expand his empire, was often dismayed by Hitler's overly aggressive foreign policy goals (although he sometimes tried to emulate them) For example, Mussolini had informed Hitler that Italy would not be war ready until 1943. However, his memos were left unread and Hitler invaded Poland in September 1939 regardless.

# data[].attributes.body
Review the sources by historians in MTGW pages 129-152 (sources from historians always in a yellow box). Consider Professor Gooch’s presentation of three main viewpoints of Mussolini’s foreign policy.

Based on your knowledge and understanding, which perspective ‘fits’ best? Post you answer on this padlet here.  Your answer must contain evidence from TWO sources in order to support your opinion.  You may use textual sources from the book, or elsewhere.  Evidence may also include political cartoons. If you find yet another viewpoint from a different historian, post that too.