AHC: Preserve the French Union

640px-Empire_colonial_français_(1920).png


The French Union was a post-WWII project by the Fourth Republic to preserve the remnants of the French Empire, similar to what the British were able to do with the Commonwealth.

However, with the wars in Vietnam and Algeria, as well as growing nationalism in West Africa, the project failed and the union eventually fell apart.

You goal is to make it work by any means necessary, while keeping at least 75% of the territory as seen on the map.

Bonus Points: Do it while saving the Fourth Republic from collapse
 
Last edited:
It's not that complicated really. I mean, in theory.

First, a better handling of Dien Bien Phu. During the battle, the Conférence de Genêve was taking place. Now if the the camp doesn't fall/doesn't happen, France is in a much stronger position. You'd have an independant Tonkin, possibly half of Annam and a State of Cochinchine or something similar.

That has two MASSIVE consequences. First the military don't feel cheated by the civilian government and it gives them back a bit of pride after WWII.
It also shows the independentist movement that total victory is out of reach.
More confident, the French government can maybe negotiate better with the autonomist mouvements of Algeria and Africa.

IF (and that's a big if) the Algerians can get some semblance of reconnaissance for their role in WWI and WWII, as full citizenship or a parliament of Algeria or something (maybe full citizenship for veterans? That would be politically acceptable even by the colons), you don't get troubles in Algeria.

You will have autonomist mouvements in Africa and France will oblige (colonies are costly) but that's what they'll be: autonomists, not independantists. Will that change much? It could be argued Francafrique was a form of protectorate but that's another debate.

For the African colonies, autonomy was an option but the Metropole will not want to keep them as full fledged. Even when Gabon wanted to be transformed into a département (actual part of France, probably similar status to Guyana) it was turned down.

Madagascar seems a bit tougher, it's far away and of relatively low value. Lebanon/Syria is dead in the water and will have to go.
 
For the African colonies, autonomy was an option but the Metropole will not want to keep them as full fledged. Even when Gabon wanted to be transformed into a département (actual part of France, probably similar status to Guyana) it was turned down.

This is what always confused the heck outta me as far as French Imperial Policy went post 1900.

What was the point in "assimilation" as a state policy if the end goal wasn't any actual "assimilation" into the political economy? I mean, Africans in the Metropole was an actual thing for at least 40 years bythe time the Union project was underway.
 
GlobalHumanism said:
This is what always confused the heck outta me as far as French Imperial Policy went post 1900.

What was the point in "assimilation" as a state policy if the end goal wasn't any actual "assimilation" into the political economy? I mean, Africans in the Metropole was an actual thing for at least 40 years bythe time the Union project was underway.

Well, state policy and actual reality are two different things. The state might want soemthing and the colons on the ground another. And in the end, it's a bunch of negroes in a mosquito-filled swamp doing some rambling while you have Germany next door.
Precision before the ban, I use the term negroe as it would have been used back then (as a descriptive like we'd say black now), not that I endorse the current connotation.


Regarding the economic integration:
Industrialization in Sub-Saharan Africa and import substitution policy ; Brazilian Journal of Political Economy said:
Until 1949, international agents and particularly local colonial Governments had never encouraged the introduction of a vigorous industrial policy in African colonies. This type of policy would come into conflict with the main mission of European rulers to provide the metropolis with a market for their manufactured goods and supply of cheap raw materials. On the other hand, major European trading firms kept their commitment to the flow of products from the colonies to the international market in the name of the metropolis. Moreover, these big traders managed to survive due only to the vicissitudes of the international market and the instability of African commodity prices, fully exploiting local producers. As a result, they had become extremely careful and hesitant to change from high liquidity export/import investments to risky investments in fixed capital with a low level of liquidity in African markets, which they knew were limited to the few Europeans residing there.

Political assimilation on the other hand was happening, although quite slowly. Cultural assimilation (and political, it's a very similar thing) takes a lot of time. It took a couple centuries for the Romans to fully assimilate their people. The African colonies kinda went on turbo for that, with African serving in the metropole and wanting to more or less stay integrated only 50-60 years after the conquest. It also helps when the people you colonise don't have a strong sense of nation. Not that there weren't tribes or anything, but I doubt there was a nationalist sentiment as strong as in Europe.
 
Ditch Vietnam as unsustainable and too expensive. that butterflies French military defeat and related loss of prestige and resources. It also shows other that french are willing to negotiate. Give Algerian interior more autonomy, i.e. coastal areas are part of France (as OTL) but rest isn't. Not sure about other colonies but I think it wouldn't be a stretch to get them to agree to large degree of autonomy instead of full independance
 
aktarian said:
Give Algerian interior more autonomy, i.e. coastal areas are part of France (as OTL) but rest isn't. Not sure about other colonies but I think it wouldn't be a stretch to get them to agree to large degree of autonomy instead of full independance

Wouldn't have solved the problem. Coastal Algeria is the only "useful" territory there is for your taxbase. The gas fields can be exploited by French companies without control of the country.

It's not a matter of which part is French or not but whether the muslim citizens have representation and equal right. What you want is a way to destroy or severe the apartheid state that was there
 
Wouldn't have solved the problem. Coastal Algeria is the only "useful" territory there is for your taxbase. The gas fields can be exploited by French companies without control of the country.

It's not a matter of which part is French or not but whether the muslim citizens have representation and equal right. What you want is a way to destroy or severe the apartheid state that was there

Which unfortunately is politically nigh-ASB, as the colons there had a lot of influence in the Assembly IIRC...
 
oreocruncher said:
Which unfortunately is politically nigh-ASB, as the colons there had a lot of influence in the Assembly IIRC...
Sure, if the goal is full equal rights for everyone. However, I can really see a case of full citizenship given to veterans.
That would be a politically strong case without upsetting too much the balance of power
 
Sure, if the goal is full equal rights for everyone. However, I can really see a case of full citizenship given to veterans.
That would be a politically strong case without upsetting too much the balance of power

Once you give it to them, the floodgates open, because the precedent has been set...
 
oreocruncher said:
Once you give it to them, the floodgates open, because the precedent has been set...

It was already given to the Spanish, who were living in slums and in the arab districts, and the jews.

I do think IF someone had come up with the idea and motivation, it would have been a defensible platform at the time. They shed their blood for France and all that.

Would be interesting if, especially in Dark Africa, it would turn up to be some sort of mini-nobility or would be seen as pariahs like the harkis after '62
 
Top