Dunkirk Evacuation Fails but France Fights On

Hi guys. I just thought about an interesting and hopefully not-explored scenario before and that is: what if the BEF was trapped and annihilated at Dunkirk, but France doesn't surrender, instead relocating to North Africa? (Perhaps Petain has a heart attack after hearing the BEF are destroyed, and Reynauld convinces everyone to keep fighting) Now this will be quite interesting because the British public will be calling for peace while the French are the ones standing alone against Nazi Germany. What effect will this have on the African campaigns? The Battle of Britain? What about Barbarossa? Any comments are welcomed!:)
 
I've heard of them, but did the BEF get wiped out at Dunkirk? And basing this on what other members have said France fights on isnt really plausible......:confused:
 
I've heard of them, but did the BEF get wiped out at Dunkirk? And basing this on what other members have said France fights on isnt really plausible......:confused:

I haven't seen people saying it isn't plausible, not saying they haven't, I just haven't run across those particular threads. As for the BEF, under the "June 6 to 10" subpage the first sentence is "After the fighting in May which saw the encirclement and elimination of so much of the French armies and the British Expeditionary Force, the German offensive was resumed yesterday."
 
I think what was described was just OTL events, a good chunk of the allied forces was eliminated by the Germans even with the evacuation, and by the time the decision was made to fight on Dunkirk had already happened, so no change is made I think.

Anyhow this scenario posits that the British are severely weakened but the French have resolved the fight, perhaps even with the British voting out Churchill and in Halifax, with the weird situation that is France fighting Germany alone until America is brought in to the fray. Perhaps with Britain neutral, no Normandy landings, and perhaps Italy/Southern French approach?
 
The annihilation of the British and no evacuation would put Britain's abilities to continue fighting at risk merely because they'd have 200-300K more men in German POW camps rather than awaiting resupply and reorganization in Britain. They would not be able to help the French all that much.

If France fights on after the capture of Paris, by this point, the avenues of advance open to the Germans are numerous and the country at whole can be blitzed, but it will need to happen once the Germans are able to take a 1 week break to reorganize. The hedgehog defense has been vindicated at this point, but there aren't a ton of natural aids to defense, and the Italians are still fruitlessly pushing west. I am guessing that the Blitzkrieg revs up again towards the end of June and most of Southern France falls by the end of July at the latest. The troops in the Maginot line would be trapped by this point and not able to contribute to defense, and the Germans would be able to occupy a lot of open country, with the same issues that killed the Allies in Northern France, refugees clogging the roads, complete air superiority for the Luftwaffe, and morale problems, contributing to another collapse.

If the French as a whole do not sign an armistice and go into government in exile, with the colonies not being collaborationist, it could effect things, and make the Italians in Africa think twice about attacking east, as they'd have to contend with whatever the French have in Tunisia and Algeria. The occupation costs for the Germans would be much higher as well, and that would have an impact.

Ultimately though, I don't know how this would change things long term.

So many things wrong with this I don't know where to began...
 
For the Germans, there are both positive and negative outcomes from this scenario. For the negative, obviously the conquest of France takes longer, involves more losses, and probably more troops are needed for the occupation. On the positive side, the increased length of the fighting may force OKW to cancel the BoB to keep Barbarossa on track, which would double Luftwaffe strength when it begins. Without the BEF, the British might be weaker in North Africa, and the Italians wouldn't then require German help, meaning the Africa Corps is also available for the Eastern Front. Then there's the big one, if Halifax becomes PM a peace deal might be negotiated, with all the possible ramifications which have been discussed extensively on this forum.
 
Hm, it they don't try to evacuate (beyond, say, injured men), how long could the BEF be kept supplied with the facilities available to them?
 
Last edited:
how long could the BEF be kept supplied with the facilities available to them?

Not long, the channel ports were modern, but not high capacity. Nominal peacetime capacity of Dunkirk was maybe 4000 tons daily. Even if increased by 5% through emergency measures thats maybe 6,000 tons daily. Supplying the BEF & any French Corps present would require a minimum of 600+ tons daily per division slice for intense defensive combat. Add in combat losses from ships sunk or material destroyed ashore & the requirement heads towards 700 tons per division slice. The largest requirement would be artillery ammunition. The defenders are going to have to expend massive quantities to repel German air and ground attacks. If the ammo trains from the docks to the AT, AA, or field guns slow the defense is in serious trouble. After ammunition there is POL to keep the motorized units tactically functional, and then replacement equipment.

For comparison the logistics planning for Op Overlord allocated 900 tons daily per "division slice" for the first 90 days of offensive operations & 950 tons daily for the next 90 days. Division Slice being defined as the total number of Allied units ashore, including air force units but not naval shore units, divided by the total number of ground combat division HQ. So all the support units from corps, army, army group & above. It averaged out to about 44,000 men per division slice. (Source: Ruppenthal. 'Logistics in Overlord')

A coastal enclave would need close to 1,400 tons daily for each 100,000 men present, or 6,800 tons minimum for a 500,000 man lodgment. Its difficult to see how the Brits could ramp up that sort of delivery & distribution on the fly through one or even two small Channel ports.
 

jahenders

Banned
Even with the Dunkirk evacuation (of Brits and French), France surrendered. With an additional blow of a slaughter at Dunkirk, it's hard to see France really fighting on.

That being said, if they DID (somehow) fight on, it could have made a big difference.

First, you'd have more German forces tied up in France longer.

Second, the French Navy could really cause a lot of grief for the Italian Navy. As it was, the Italians couldn't support North Africa, with the addition of French harrassment, the Italians would never get anything there.

Third, French forces marching in North Africa could give Rommel something to worry about much sooner.

Fourth, if the French are clearly fighting with the allies, then Torch isn't really an 'operation' -- it's a staging operation, allowing the allies to move more troops farther and faster. Again, Rommel has to worry about his West flank far more and far sooner.

Fifth, they and the US, UK, etc have a better impression of French courage -- no jokes about them surrendering at every turn, etc. This may make the French more aggressive after the war.

Hi guys. I just thought about an interesting and hopefully not-explored scenario before and that is: what if the BEF was trapped and annihilated at Dunkirk, but France doesn't surrender, instead relocating to North Africa? (Perhaps Petain has a heart attack after hearing the BEF are destroyed, and Reynauld convinces everyone to keep fighting) Now this will be quite interesting because the British public will be calling for peace while the French are the ones standing alone against Nazi Germany. What effect will this have on the African campaigns? The Battle of Britain? What about Barbarossa? Any comments are welcomed!:)
 
How about a scenario where the weather makes it impossible for Operation Dynamo to be carried out at the capacity it did ... somehow, faced with certain destruction at Dunkirk, the remaining troops mount a surprise attack, breaking through the German lines and re-joining the fight further south?
 

Deleted member 1487

Hi guys. I just thought about an interesting and hopefully not-explored scenario before and that is: what if the BEF was trapped and annihilated at Dunkirk, but France doesn't surrender, instead relocating to North Africa? (Perhaps Petain has a heart attack after hearing the BEF are destroyed, and Reynauld convinces everyone to keep fighting) Now this will be quite interesting because the British public will be calling for peace while the French are the ones standing alone against Nazi Germany. What effect will this have on the African campaigns? The Battle of Britain? What about Barbarossa? Any comments are welcomed!:)
Why would they be willing to ITTL when IOTL with less defeats they opted not to fight on? If Britain is trying to exit the war, why the hell would France, who's metropol is lost, try and stick it out when their only means of support was opting to quit?
 
Top