1941-1942: Could the Allies ever have occupied and held Vichy Corsica?

here's a (kinda farfetched) POD that might help with the scenario... let's suppose that Churchill decides not to send all those troops to Greece, and the Brits complete their conquest of Italian N. Africa, and Hitler declines to send his own forces to help out a lost cause... and the Americans still enter the war after Pearl Harbor... but this time, they have a different strategic situation in the Med, with the Italians and Germans out of N. Africa... might they decide to invade Sardinia and Corsica sometime in late 1942? Granted it's a huge stretch, and they would likely decide to take over French N. Africa first, but it gets the job done...
 

Deleted member 1487

here's a (kinda farfetched) POD that might help with the scenario... let's suppose that Churchill decides not to send all those troops to Greece, and the Brits complete their conquest of Italian N. Africa, and Hitler declines to send his own forces to help out a lost cause... and the Americans still enter the war after Pearl Harbor... but this time, they have a different strategic situation in the Med, with the Italians and Germans out of N. Africa... might they decide to invade Sardinia and Corsica sometime in late 1942? Granted it's a huge stretch, and they would likely decide to take over French N. Africa first, but it gets the job done...
I think I did a what if about that here or on another forum and the answers I got back from some knowledgable people was that British logistics wouldn't allow for the conquest of Libya before Axis reinforcements arrived. If there was not a Greek campaign by the Brits, then Rommel is not going to drive to the border of Egypt in 1941, but we could well see a Gazala Line. The thing is then that is probably where he tops out because the Brits would be a LOT stronger in Africa in 1941. The Greek campaign for the Germans then goes a lot easier, but Africa is a harder slog. It's hard to then see the Brits push them out of Libya prior to 1942, but Malta has a much easier go of things and there is never a threat to Egypt. That lengthens the British supply lines, but they can build up their North Africa rail line sooner. I'm thinking a Tunisian campaign probably happens in 1942 as the Axis forces are shoved back into Vichy North Africa, which puts Vichy in a rough spot and who knows what happens with their neutrality in 1942 prior to Torch then. I'd still say that the US/UK Torch invasion doesn't change much over OTL so long as Vichy is still neutral and fights back against the Allies initially, but then the Axis are already built up in Tunisia early, which complicates things.

You have to remember though that Wallies were cautious to a fault in WW2, which while saving casualties and being a prudent strategy, delayed victory considerably and makes a Sardinia/Corsica invasion early, prior to Tunisia falling, tough to imagine given the personalities at play.
 
I think I did a what if about that here or on another forum and the answers I got back from some knowledgable people was that British logistics wouldn't allow for the conquest of Libya before Axis reinforcements arrived. If there was not a Greek campaign by the Brits, then Rommel is not going to drive to the border of Egypt in 1941, but we could well see a Gazala Line. The thing is then that is probably where he tops out because the Brits would be a LOT stronger in Africa in 1941. The Greek campaign for the Germans then goes a lot easier, but Africa is a harder slog. It's hard to then see the Brits push them out of Libya prior to 1942, but Malta has a much easier go of things and there is never a threat to Egypt. That lengthens the British supply lines, but they can build up their North Africa rail line sooner. I'm thinking a Tunisian campaign probably happens in 1942 as the Axis forces are shoved back into Vichy North Africa, which puts Vichy in a rough spot and who knows what happens with their neutrality in 1942 prior to Torch then. I'd still say that the US/UK Torch invasion doesn't change much over OTL so long as Vichy is still neutral and fights back against the Allies initially, but then the Axis are already built up in Tunisia early, which complicates things.

You have to remember though that Wallies were cautious to a fault in WW2, which while saving casualties and being a prudent strategy, delayed victory considerably and makes a Sardinia/Corsica invasion early, prior to Tunisia falling, tough to imagine given the personalities at play.
yeah, it is a rather hard POD to accomplish, but I'm not sure how else you get the conditions in the OP... unless you have a 'Free French operating in Algeria' combined with the 'no Brits in Greece' maybe... even then, it's still hard to get the Brits to conquer Italian N. Africa all that fast...
 

Deleted member 1487

yeah, it is a rather hard POD to accomplish, but I'm not sure how else you get the conditions in the OP... unless you have a 'Free French operating in Algeria' combined with the 'no Brits in Greece' maybe... even then, it's still hard to get the Brits to conquer Italian N. Africa all that fast...
The Free French weren't around IOTL 1941 yet (not to the degree they were by 1942), you'd need a 'France Fights On' POD.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tunisia was conquered immediately too - by the Axis.

But seriously: if Axis forces had not occupied Tunisia, it would have been under Allied control by D+3 or so.

The Easternmost landing was in Algiers.
Algiers to Tunis it's some 800 kms.
In four days? That's pretty fast.


This has been suggested in various TLs - for instance Splinters ends with the remnants of the Panzer Armee Afrika trying to force their way across the Mareth Line. But my thought on this: to what end? If the Axis forces have to retreat into Tunisia, they've been decisively defeated. Unless substantially reinforced, all they can do is prolong a losing battle. Who benefits? Not Germany; maybe Italy, but the decision is Germany's, really.

Moving into Tunisia under arms violates French neutrality, and the French won't like it one bit; it risks other French colonies going over to Free France. Germany would have to coerce Vichy, and commit additional troops, or at the very least allocate a lot of gasoline needed elsewhere. Of course one can always underestimate Hitler's folly.

One other point: If Hitler's favorite general Rommel is not commanding in Africa (for whatever reason), ISTM that Hitler is likely to lose interest in North Africa. If say Rommel was wounded or captured during CRUSADER, that would do it.

Tunis is a port with serious handling capacity. Tripoli isn't. Tunis is within range of land-based fighters in Marsala; Tripoli isn't.
If the Axis decides to make a stand in North Africa, yes, even just to delay the Allies, Tunis is better than Tripoli.

The latter point would be the reason, never mind Rommel or whoever is in command. If the whole North African coast is in the Allies' hands, then Italy is next. That's not just against Italian interests; it's also against German interests.
 

Redbeard

Banned
If the Wallies really wanted to, I'm sure it could be done - taking Corsica and/or Sardinia - and even holding them. But I don't think it would be worth the effort. You sure could tie up some Axis air and sea effort, but that was pretty much tied up anyway, and the Wallied cost would not at least be in merchant shipping (and landing craft), which always was a critically scarce commodity. The Wallies will need the shipping more than they would need Corsica or Sardinia.
 

Archibald

Banned
yes, that's what I was trying to say...

Indeed in France fights On we got a battle for Corsica in February - March 1941.

After France was entirely invaded on August 8, 1940 Corsica was left standing as the last bit of metropolitan France not in German hands. That was not acceptable and soon Hitler planned what was called "Operation Merkur"

just like OTL battle for Crete Merkur become the grave of many German paratroopers. It was gamed as a very close run but ultimately the Axis air and naval power prevailed.

We got a very detailed battle lasting a month, with Ajaccio being mostly flattened by Luftwaffe carpet bombing.

The French fleet did his best, notably a heavy naval bombardment of the German beachhead by heavy cruisers and Strasbourg and Dunkerque battlecruisers 330 mm guns, covered by the aircraft carrier Bearn's Brewster Buffalos.

Bearn however was sunk by Stukas, with a heavy cruiser (think it was Foch). The Italian navy was heavily involved in Corsica invasions (through convoys) and paid a very high price.

In the brief period before the German invasion France and Great Britain made plans to use Corsica as a forward base for the RAF bomber command.
FFO authors got a very funny, subtle joke.
"We could base Wellington bombers in Corsica to bomb Italy and southern Germany" Churchill said.
Yet he was surprised to see De Gaulle sigh.
"Wellington in Corsica, the land of Napoleon. How ironic is that " :p

So you can see that a battle of Corsica has been wargamed, except it is in the FFO scenario. Still the geography wouldn't change, and the French troops could be replaced by whatever troops the British empire send to OTL Crete.
 
Last edited:
Top