Anglo-French split

Is there anyway to create a split between Britain and France following the Great War? I'm making a mini map series about a French-German power struggle across the continent throughout most of the 20th century, and I need to find a way to break-up the Entente first.
My first thought was a Fashoda style colonial crisis, but I think that's pretty unlikely in 1920.
A French continental hegemony could also work, Britains traditional fear of the continent under one nation will have most of the tabloids shitting themselves.

So any idea's?
 
Maybe France continues to occupy the Rhineland after the Dawes plan and just acts all around aggressive?
 
Maybe something regarding disagreements over war debts from WWI?

Or perhaps a longer, bloodier WWI causing the French to perpetuate the myth of the British as cowardly defeatists, which would arouse hatred and mistrust on both sides.
 
Along similar lines, if the spring 1918 offensive is concentrated against French positions causing defeats there with the British having to supply reinforcements to shore up the lines.
Post War, the French could view it as "evidence" of British & German imperialist conspiracy, especially if a successful spring offensive allows Germany to negotiate a peace from a stronger position than the OTL.
From the British perspective, it would add to the existing distrust of the French in that "again, if we're not fighting against them, we're having to fight their wars for them".
 
Maybe France continues to occupy the Rhineland after the Dawes plan and just acts all around aggressive?

That could be a possibility or even a different WWI where the allies do a bit better and the US doesn't enter but you still have the Russian collapse. That means that France sees no counter to a revived German power, especially if relations with Britain are rocky so they want a buffer zone in the Rhineland.

I think there was a good bit of tension between the two OTL as there were differences over policy and interests. Also with Germany, Austria and Russia out of play for various reasons they were the only two European Great powers left standing other than a Italy that had seen a less than impressive and very costly war.

I could see two problems:
a) Unless France slacked up at some point I can't see Germany seriously being able to rebuild it's military, presuming Todyo1798 is thinking of military conflict between the two.

b) If somehow it did, it's greater population and the experience of WWI might lead to a Franco-British re-alliance in the face of a common threat. Although if France has kept the Rhineland and possibly vassilised Belgium that could change.

Steve
 
Currently my idea involves US non-entry into the war. The 1918 Spring Offensive fails as in OTL, however the fact that it failed against the Entente troops that Germany had been fighting against the whole war (rather than Entente troops and US soldiers), and the added resources gained from Brest-Litovsk seemed to have done nothing, it's going to lead to a major morale dip for the German troops.
The Entente don't have the men to launch a major offensive as it would simply leave the lines frightfully exposed. So it really comes down to, "who will collapse first" France or Germany. It turns out to be Germany, where political and social tensions erupt after the collapse of AH.
Troops are called away from the front line to deal with rioters, revolutionaries and attempted seccessions. The Entente see an oppertunity and launch their own offensive to try and push through to the Rhine. It works suprisingly well, mainly due to the exhausted German troops surrendering as soon as they can.

Without the US in the war, negotiations over what to do with Germany are between Britain and France. Lloyd George is in favour of carving up Germany as OTL and the same level of reperations. Clemencau however is even worse than rl, demanding the economic occupation of the Ruhr, East Prussia to go to Poland, much harsher reperations and maybe even the creation of a South Germany (Bavaria and Baden-Württemberg).
This leads to French suspicions that the British are more concerned with returning Germany to normality as prosperous Great Power that can be traded with for huge amounts of cash, rather than removing France's greatest threat.

France tries to create a more independent foreign policy based around various alliances and pacts with Germany's neighbours (Little Entente on steroids). Britain see's this as a threat, the traditional fear of one nation being too powerful on the continent. As with any other period in history, the British policy towards Europe is to try to and prevent French hegemony.

And that's how you get the split :p

I could see two problems:
a) Unless France slacked up at some point I can't see Germany seriously being able to rebuild it's military, presuming Todyo1798 is thinking of military conflict between the two.

b) If somehow it did, it's greater population and the experience of WWI might lead to a Franco-British re-alliance in the face of a common threat. Although if France has kept the Rhineland and possibly vassilised Belgium that could change.

Steve

a) With no LoN, and Britain now supporting Germany in offering France some competition for domiance, the only country left to make sure Germany sticks to the military limitations of the Treaty of Versailles is France. Germany will ignore them as they did in OTL.

b) France is forming it's own alliance bloc outside of British influence, mainly from Eastern European nations. Poland, Czechslovakia etc, have just as much to fear from a renchauvist Germany as France does.
 
Last edited:
There are no border disputes that would warrant conflict - to say nothing about war - between the two nations in 1918.

Hegemony can't work without an earlier POD. It requires a demographic superiority that 1918 France (or Britain for that matter) doesn't enjoy. Even a fragmented Germany wouldn't lead to a French continental hegemony - France wasn't hegemonic when Germany was fragmented pre-1870, for example.

Plus, if France's chief rival remains Germany in your series, common sense dictates France never starts a conflict with its closest and most likely ally.
 
What about a left wing French government supporting the Republicans / Anarchists / Communists in the Spanish Civil War and a pro-Franco leaning UK government (Mosely or even Churchill).

Should be enough to sour relations particularly if British volunteers end up fighting French volunteers
 
Hegemony can't work without an earlier POD. It requires a demographic superiority that 1918 France (or Britain for that matter) doesn't enjoy. Even a fragmented Germany wouldn't lead to a French continental hegemony - France wasn't hegemonic when Germany was fragmented pre-1870, for example.

Plus, if France's chief rival remains Germany in your series, common sense dictates France never starts a conflict with its closest and most likely ally.

By hegemony, I mean France leading a continental alliance.
See my previous post to explain why France doesn't trust Britain. They aren't going to war, though Britain will be in support of Germany and Frances other rivals.

What about a left wing French government supporting the Republicans / Anarchists / Communists in the Spanish Civil War and a pro-Franco leaning UK government (Mosely or even Churchill).

Should be enough to sour relations particularly if British volunteers end up fighting French volunteers

Well a left-wing government would probably be more concerned with reconciling the Germans than keeping them down. However I think a moderate Conservative French governemtn would still support the Republicans, especially if the rebels are getting British/German/Italian backing.
 
Last edited:
Todyo1798

Currently my idea involves US non-entry into the war. The 1918 Spring Offensive fails as in OTL, however the fact that it failed against the Entente troops that Germany had been fighting against the whole war (rather than Entente troops and US soldiers), and the added resources gained from Brest-Litovsk seemed to have done nothing, it's going to lead to a major morale dip for the German troops.
The Entente don't have the men to launch a major offensive as it would simply leave the lines frightfully exposed. So it really comes down to, "who will collapse first" France or Germany. It turns out to be Germany, where political and social tensions erupt after the collapse of AH.
Troops are called away from the front line to deal with rioters, revolutionaries and attempted seccessions. The Entente see an oppertunity and launch their own, pretty badly thought out offensive to try and push through to the Rhine. It suprisngly works, though mainly due to the exhausted German troops surrendering as soon as they can.

Without the US in the war, negotiations over what to do with Germany are between Britain and France. Lloyd George is in favour of carving up Germany as OTL and the same level of reperations. Clemencau however is even worse than rl, demanding the economic occupation of the Ruhr, East Prussia to go to Poland, much harsher reperations and maybe even the creation of a South Germany (Bavaria and Baden-Württemberg).
This leads to French suspicions that the British are more concerned with returning Germany to normality as prosperous Great Power that can be traded with for huge amounts of cash, rather than removing France's greatest threat.

France tries to create a more independent foreign policy based around various alliances and pacts with Germany's neighbours (Little Entente on steroids). Britain see's this as a threat, the traditional fear of one nation being too powerful on the continent. As with any other period in history, the British policy towards Europe is to try to and prevent French hegemony.

And that's how you get the split :p

That sounds reasonable apart from the fact that an allied offensive at that point, with the experience and equipment available for the allies it might be tight on men but is likely to be pretty well organised. Without US involvement and with Russia prostrate I could easily see Britain and France divided on the peace conditions like that.


a) With no LoN, and Britain now supporting Germany in offering France some competition for domiance, the only country left to make sure Germany sticks to the military limitations of the Treaty of Versailles is France. Germany will ignore them as they did in OTL.

That is a receipt for French military intervention before they think Germany gets too strong. Probably with support from the allies mentioned below. Could get very messy.

b) France is forming it's own alliance bloc outside of British influence, mainly from Eastern European nations. Poland, Czechslovakia etc, have just as much to fear from a renchauvist Germany as France does.

This was pretty much as OTL but with a stronger [theoretically] and more desperate France again likely to see conflict.

In those circumstances Germany is going to seek outside aid. If Britain isn't willing to put forces in harms way, which may be the case, then you could see an early link with however comes out on top in Russia.

Steve
 
b) France is forming it's own alliance bloc outside of British influence, mainly from Eastern European nations. Poland, Czechslovakia etc, have just as much to fear from a renchauvist Germany as France does.

This is a serious problem, because no much hate you put between them, any French Leader with a brain bigger than a monkey will not burn all their bridges with the Brits ... the Germans are a too much serious menace.

Its not impossible ( ala Crossroads France TL ) but is HIGHLY unlikely ...
 
This is a serious problem, because no much hate you put between them, any French Leader with a brain bigger than a monkey will not burn all their bridges with the Brits ... the Germans are a too much serious menace.

Its not impossible ( ala Crossroads France TL ) but is HIGHLY unlikely ...
Can I have a link for that timeline it seems interesting.
 
That sounds reasonable apart from the fact that an allied offensive at that point, with the experience and equipment available for the allies it might be tight on men but is likely to be pretty well organised. Without US involvement and with Russia prostrate I could easily see Britain and France divided on the peace conditions like that.
I was thinking that the German collapse would have taken a lot of the Entente command by suprise, so an offensive had to be quickly thought up. But of course they would likely have planned for this, along with their own campaign against a potential French mutiny. Plus a well thought out and executed campaign would leave France in a much stronger position.

That is a receipt for French military intervention before they think Germany gets too strong. Probably with support from the allies mentioned below. Could get very messy.
International support for German rearnament could make France cautious of acting agaisnt them. Also some sort of crisis could distract them, like the Italian invasion of Abyssinia did in OTl.

This was pretty much as OTL but with a stronger [theoretically] and more desperate France again likely to see conflict.
Yes it's based on a more successfull and expanded Little Entente. Czechslovakia, Romania and Yugoslavia. With the addition of Poland and maybe Belgium.

In those circumstances Germany is going to seek outside aid. If Britain isn't willing to put forces in harms way, which may be the case, then you could see an early link with however comes out on top in Russia.
Britain will go with the traditonal method of continental warfare, an expeditionary force to back up your main ally. The war for Britain will be primarily colonial and naval.
France's alliances in Eastern Europe are directed primarily agaisnt Germany, though there is also the USSR to be wary off. Stalin will off course be suspicious of everyone, though he will definately consider some sort of agreement with Germany to deal with France's eastern allies.

This is a serious problem, because no much hate you put between them, any French Leader with a brain bigger than a monkey will not burn all their bridges with the Brits ... the Germans are a too much serious menace.

Its not impossible ( ala Crossroads France TL ) but is HIGHLY unlikely ...
Yes but Britain is suspicious of France's growing alliance system that does not include them. They want Germany to beat France in round two so as to level the playing field, and stop the Brits worrying about being pushed off the continent.
Plus, France's own suspicions get in the way. After the way Britain "back stabbed" them over Versailles, and the support British banks are giving Germany in paying reparations and stabilising industry, few of the French elite believe Britain will stand with them again. So they need to learn to look after themselves, that means a naval build up. France can now blockade Germany almost as well as Britain did during the war. Britain really doesn't like this, traditonal fears come into play.

France's ideal scenario would allow them to continue standing with Britain whilst they sit comfortably behind the Maignot line with their strong eastern allies ready to bltiz into an already weak Germany with them at a moments notice.
But that's not the case. Britain wants trade with an economically strong Germany. Economically strong Germany means a Germany that has money to spend on a military build up.
It's not going to work out between them.
 
Last edited:
Affects on Asia

It occurs to me that an Anglo-French split will be likely to the affect the second Sino-Japanese war. Japan is in a position to threaten French Indo-China, which is already a threat to Hong Kong and shipping in the South China Sea.
Meanwhile a stable China can threaten the British Raj and Burma.
 
Last edited:
Top