In the immediate postwar period, the anti-Fascists as well as supporters of the Monarchist and the qualunquist right, recycled themes already used in Anglo-American and Soviet propaganda. Their purpose was to highlight in public discourse how the Ítalo-German alliance was exclusively the personal initiative of Mussolini and of Hitler, against the sentiments of the Italian people, and contrary to the national traditions of the Risorgimento. The condemnation of the Axis as an ‘unnatural ally’, the result of the exclusive desire of the two dictators, was confirmed in the publication in Italian of Ciano’s diaries, which attracted much attention. The Italian people were described as victims of the Fascist war alongside Germany. This approach also informed the way that the Italian soldiers were depicted. They had been sacrificed by the Duce in a war against the interests and the sentiments of the nation, fought out of a sense of duty in conditions of massive inferiority. Unanimous condolences were expressed in public discourse for all the Italian fallen: this extended to those who had fought in the Axis war, as well as to those who had participated after 8 September 1943 in the Resistance movement against the German and Fascist forces. There was also a unanimous condemnation of the behaviour of the Germans, including the violent and criminal behaviour shown during the occupation of Italy, but also extending backwards to the time when the Germans were the allies of Italy. The Italian press, also taking as its inspiration Allied propaganda, described the Germans as ‘false allies’, always arrogant, who had not hesitated to sacrifice their Italian comrades at the time of crucial battles at El Alamein and on the Don, when they had betrayed them and abandoned them to the enemy.
The anti-Fascist press, as well as the memoirs produced in military and diplomatic circles linked to the monarchy, were silent about, minimised, or else reshaped the war crimes committed by the Italians in the occupied territories, especially in the Balkans (Yugoslavia, Albania, and Greece), but also in France and in the Soviet Union. Instead, the solidarity and the generous help given by Italian soldiers to the civilian populations were highlighted. The ‘good Italian’ was contrasted to the hateful, ‘bad German’, responsible for atrocious crimes which the Italians had attempted to oppose. The Italians were described as the saviours of the Jews, a description which, however, served to hide the fact that there had been a repressive policy in the occupied territories, characterised by the burning of villages, shootings, and the deportation of the civilian population. These war crimes, certainly less extensive than those committed by the German ally, were very efficiently hidden. The capacity of Italian governments to avoid handing over war criminals (the so called missing Italian Nuremberg) contributed to this process. The individuals who were put on trial in British and American tribunals were only those people who had committed crimes against Allied prisoners of war, and not crimes against civilians. The anti-Fascist left accused the leaders of Fascism, and of the Armed Forces, of war crimes, but this stance did not extend to the ordinary Italian soldier, where the contrast between the ‘good Italian’ and the ‘bad German’ was shared by all. This depiction was used by Italy as a ‘diplomatic card’ to obtain a better outcome during discussions of the Italian peace treaty.