France Fights On - What if Indochina resists?

Well, France and Great Britain can size or keep both Corsica and Sardinia in the fall of 1940 but they won't be able to hold them past spring 1941 - because of massive German and Italian airpower too close from the two islands (South East France and the entire italian coast).

FFO did a thorough analysis about FIC impacting the Pearl Harbour decision (for the reason Carl mentionned). They finally decided to stay with the same day as infamy as OTL, December 7 1941. I'll try to find the debate and reason why. It is not a case of "let's stay close from OTL despite butterflies": FTL Barbarossa was pushed by 11 months, to May 17, 1942. More like the inevitability of the U.S Japanese war since 1900.
If the two Ocean Navy happens as historical that's the date that makes sense.

Basically Japan commisioned two carriers in August and September 1941.by the time the crew and air groups were fully assembled and trained and the ships sailed to Pearl (slowly to maximise fuel) it was 7 December 1941. Unless you are willing to go with 4 carriers Pearl Harbour happened on the earliest possible date. Well they probably could have done 5 December 1941 if they wanted to but they felt they would be more likely to achieve success attacking on a Sunday.

With the known American ships under construction (two Ocean Navy) Japan felt they needed every possible week prior to the Americans building their fleet in order to force a decisive battle and force a surrender before America built their fleet.
 

Archibald

Banned
So instead of the BoB we might see a massive air battle over the Med. & the Italians reluctantly risking large portions of their Navy.

There is a BoB but far weaker than OTL and later (since the Battle of France ends on August 8 and the Luftaffe lose 1500 aircrafts). And indeed the naval and air battles all around the Mediterranean are a massive carnage of men, soldiers, ships, and aircrafts. There is a blitz against Malta and North Africa, a massive battle for Corsica (Operation Merkur, it become the grave of the German paratroopers instead of Crete) and a stalemate / meat grinder in Greece with Rommel Albania Korps (!) except no-one cares about albania, so Rommel call it Skanderberg Korps, a tribute to Alexander the great.
 
There is a BoB but far weaker than OTL and later (since the Battle of France ends on August 8 and the Luftaffe lose 1500 aircrafts). And indeed the naval and air battles all around the Mediterranean are a massive carnage of men, soldiers, ships, and aircrafts. There is a blitz against Malta and North Africa, a massive battle for Corsica (Operation Merkur, it become the grave of the German paratroopers instead of Crete) and a stalemate / meat grinder in Greece with Rommel Albania Korps (!) except no-one cares about albania, so Rommel call it Skanderberg Korps, a tribute to Alexander the great.

In Dunois' TL things go much the same, but Rommel succeeds in driving the Allies from Mainland Greece. It was implied that there would be Allied landings in the Balkans sometime in 1942.

I've followed arguments about the viability of a Axis effort in Africa, with Tunisia in operation. The short version is Germany must make Africa its main effort July 1940 & deep into 1941. My take is the Italians would sensibly write off, leaving the forces in place to fight to the end with honor. Translation is they'd not be able to evacuate much. Hitlers lack of strategic sense is another matter. That and his impulsiveness could see a rush to finish off the Allies in Africa. 'Defeat them there & the rest will case in as a house of cards.' might be his view. Or maybe not. So instead of the BoB we might see a massive air battle over the Med. & the Italians reluctantly risking large portions of their Navy.

If Corsica was still in play could Hitler's grandiose plan take place there instead of Africa? Either way, the massive air and sea battle in the Med seems like a given.

Well, France and Great Britain can size or keep both Corsica and Sardinia in the fall of 1940 but they won't be able to hold them past spring 1941 - because of massive German and Italian airpower too close from the two islands (South East France and the entire italian coast).

FFO did a thorough analysis about FIC impacting the Pearl Harbour decision (for the reason Carl mentionned). They finally decided to stay with the same day as infamy as OTL, December 7 1941. I'll try to find the debate and reason why. It is not a case of "let's stay close from OTL despite butterflies": FTL Barbarossa was pushed by 11 months, to May 17, 1942. More like the inevitability of the U.S Japanese war since 1900.

Barbarossa a year later makes sense with having to deal with Greece and Corsica, but wouldn't the Russian army be significantly more ready in 1942?
 

Archibald

Banned
Barbarossa a year later makes sense with having to deal with Greece and Corsica, but wouldn't the Russian army be significantly more ready in 1942?

Unfortunately for Hitler, the answer to this question is... positive. And it hurts Germany.
 
Unfortunately for Hitler, the answer to this question is... positive. And it hurts Germany.

Plus, as Carl mentioned upthread, by summer of 1942 the U.S. is probably precariously close to finding a casus belli against Hitler even if Japan stays out of Indochina entirely.
 
What is needed in this, is for the French to declare for De Gaulle. Some years ago (ok, decades actually) I was perusing a US State Dept. document, a small folio that examined and explained what had happened in FIC just prior to (and, before IIRC) the Japanese invasion. At the time of the fall of France, the Gov. Gen. of FIC was General Catroux, who opposed any agreements with the Japanese, and wanted to declare for the Allies. He was transferred out and Adm. Jean Decoux, took over. Catroux had previously sent a mission to the US to ask for military aid, and was rebuffed by the US Govt. The US had, either en route to France, or on order, a large number of warplanes. Additionally, we had not insubstantial stockpiles of 75 and 155mm guns of French design. IF Catroux refuses orders and decides to declare for De Gaulle, he may have gotten some of those arms. Had he done so, the Japanese either may have elected not to invade, or (depending upon when they move) the French and the Allies could have given them more of a fight.
The Japanese aren't ready to move against a Free French colony at this time. Doing so would trigger a DOW from the UK. It would also trigger the US embargo, and possibly more sanctions of some type. So, IMO, they have to wait. More aid gets into China. Phibun gravitates towards the Allies instead of the Japanese, no Franco Thai war of 1940. Now the Japanese don't have the bases they need to invade Malaya and Burma. Will they still attack in 1941? Not sure, but if they do, it'll be much harder for them, and the war would be appreciably shorter.

A link with corroborating information. https://ospreypublishing.com/forum/..._store=osprey_rst&p=1&___from_store=osprey_ca

In a Franco-British Union scenario, it still seems very likely to me that the U.S. would very much like to prop up French forces in Indochina. An American politician would explain that Vietnam is the first domino which can take all of Southeast Asia down twenty years earlier and in a very different context in this timeline.
 
In a Franco-British Union scenario, it still seems very likely to me that the U.S. would very much like to prop up French forces in Indochina. An American politician would explain that Vietnam is the first domino which can take all of Southeast Asia down twenty years earlier and in a very different context in this timeline.

What you said makes sense. What we are up against is FDR's anti colonialist stance, which blinded him to the realities of greater and lesser evils, with Japanese rule being very, very much the greater evil. From reading Bernard Fall's "Street Without Joy: The French Debacle in Indochina" pp22-25, (and reading between the lines a bit) it seems FDR and Hull were acting with a view towards weakening the French postwar in FIC, gambling the Japanese wouldn't move in (or perhaps gambling they would) to end French rule postwar. Unless Catroux acts and declares FIC as FF or the Franco-British Union goes forward, then I don't know if FDR will allow arms to be sent. In OTL, when FIC went Vichy, the colony was labeled by the US Govt. as having "collaborated" with the Japanese, and US forces were ordered NOT to help them when the Japanese attacked in 1945. With the exception of General Chennault, this order was followed, to our great shame.
I'm going to have to make a trip to a campus library and get a copy of Hulls memoirs, to see what he wrote about it all, and what the mindset and justifications were.
 

Archibald

Banned
It is these kind of things that made De Gaulle relationship with Roosevelt pretty acrimonious, at least at the beginning.
FDR's anti colonialist stance, which blinded him to the realities of greater and lesser evils,

Yes and no. French colonization was pretty atrocious as far as human rights went, in FIC and elsewhere.
 
Plus, as Carl mentioned upthread, by summer of 1942 the U.S. is probably precariously close to finding a casus belli against Hitler even if Japan stays out of Indochina entirely.

In reading "Politics of Frustration: The United States in German Naval Planning 1889-1941" (Holger Herwig, 1976) Herwig essentially states that Hitler had an animus towards the US dating from WWI. His view was that it was better to go to war NOW than to wait until later when the US would only be stronger. When his racial theories were added into it, well we weren't his favorite folks. This explained his jumping in with his DOW right after Pearl Harbor.
 
There is a BoB but far weaker than OTL and later (since the Battle of France ends on August 8 and the Luftaffe lose 1500 aircrafts). And indeed the naval and air battles all around the Mediterranean are a massive carnage of men, soldiers, ships, and aircrafts. There is a blitz against Malta and North Africa, a massive battle for Corsica (Operation Merkur, it become the grave of the German paratroopers instead of Crete) and a stalemate / meat grinder in Greece with Rommel Albania Korps (!) except no-one cares about albania, so Rommel call it Skanderberg Korps, a tribute to Alexander the great.
Wasn't it about Georg Kastriot ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skanderbeg
 
In reading "Politics of Frustration: The United States in German Naval Planning 1889-1941" (Holger Herwig, 1976) Herwig essentially states that Hitler had an animus towards the US dating from WWI. ... When his racial theories were added into it, well we weren't his favorite folks. ...

'Degenerate mongrels controlled by Jews'
 

Redbeard

Banned
'Degenerate mongrels controlled by Jews'
It appears like it is almost inherent among the crooks of this world to underestimate Anglo-Saxon resolve. They look at daily life and note all the easy life and internal debate in the Anglo-Saxon world and conclude that even kicking them in the butt will not have the ketchup leave the bottle - until suddenly!
 
Top