France interventionist policy in the Cold War?

Could France have been a side of its own during the Cold War, much like how the PRC was distinct from the Eastern Bloc after the Sino-Soviet Split?
 
Two ideas.

Get them a major space programe.

Mayby keep Algeria.

Mmm, if that coup succeeds, they could align with military led nations that are tired of pro-democracy rhetoric from the US.
 
I don't think France have the economy to to have a major space programe during the early day of the cold war. But for a France on it's own you need something that destroy the USA-France relationship for a long time, and it could have serious economic repercution.
 
I don't think France have the economy to to have a major space programe during the early day of the cold war. But for a France on it's own you need something that destroy the USA-France relationship for a long time, and it could have serious economic repercution.

What about later?
 
France was the third space power but never achieved independent manned space. The current Ariane 5 Rocket was designed to be able to take a planned spacecraft into space. The Hermes was designed in 1975 to allow an independent European presence in space, independent of Russia and America. Due to funding issues, and the end of the cold war, it never happened.

Also the Hermes was designed with significant American assistance and was planned to dock with the planned American Space Station Freedom. Perhaps if more European nations are involved from the start and it's seen to be less of a 'French' thing and more European then it could achieve your goal of an independent space program. The French could do it themselves, but it's going to cost a lot and still be quite reliant on American support. The results of the enormous cost are going to be questionable. Also the POD needs to be early because in OTL it came way too late, and when it did come the space race was over. No point running an independent space campaign when the world is building the ISS etc (unless you're Chinese of course :)
 
Last edited:
But how different from ATL it could be? Didn't they pull out from NATO in 1966 and follow a very independent international policy since then?
 
But how different from ATL it could be? Didn't they pull out from NATO in 1966 and follow a very independent international policy since then?

They went away from the Nato command and send away foreign troops from their territory but for all the pratical effect France never leave Nato.
 
But how different from ATL it could be? Didn't they pull out from NATO in 1966 and follow a very independent international policy since then?

As said before, French troops leave NATO integrated command but they don't leave NATO.

In case of Cold War going hot, the French forces in Germany and France had orders to reintegrate the mutual defense. And the USA still planned to send their second wave of troops to french ports on the Atlantic.

Before 1966, France had also a very independent international policy, the British also.

But in 1956 with the War of Suez, when British and French were allied, they realized, they will be not under the US atomic umbrella, so they were forced to withdraw. The UK decided to align with the USA, the French begin to think about being independant from the USA whose support was not certain.

The second reason was the lack of support of american during the Indochina war and during the Algeria war. In both cases, the Americans were traditionnaly against colonialism so they opposed pro-colonial counter insurgencies wars. They will pay it during the Vietnam war.

If defeated in 1954, the communists in Vietnam will not be able to continue their struggle...

For example, since the creation of Israel, France was a strong support of the country until 1967... At the same time, the USA supported arab countries...
 
^^
OK guys, but if we sent France further apart from US, I see only open hostility. And where France would act? In Africa? In OTL, they already did this. Maybe they could try to develop a closer relation with South Africa? Meddling in Latin America?
 
^^
OK guys, but if we sent France further apart from US, I see only open hostility. And where France would act? In Africa? In OTL, they already did this. Maybe they could try to develop a closer relation with South Africa? Meddling in Latin America?

Open hostility.

Sorry, it's not more 2003. you should stop thinking about american and french relations as always hostile...

And I will say now, that recent history proved that the French were right... The real war was in Afghanistan and the USA lost it by going to Irak...

Why France will bother with South Africa ???

Or Latin America ???

Did the French had interests there ??? No !!!

If you looked at french interventions in Africa, it was always in support of western friendly governments, of course most of them being autocratic dictature. French fought a quasi war in Tchad against the Lybians and when the British and American lost a civil plane in Lockerbie, the French lost also a civil plane in an lybian sponsored attacks.

In Africa, iin case of civil wars or military coup, the French were always here to protect every western expatriates. The USA didn't need to send US Marines to protect their citizens in Africa, french soldiers were here for that...

The hot zone of Africa were always in english speaking countries (Liberia, Sierra Leone), or ex english colonies (Soudan), or ex belgium colonies, Zaire, Rwanda...

Only in Ivory Coast, there is a civil war who could turn to a genocidal war but it was stopped when the french destroy Gagbo airforce severals years ago... But until the madman Gagbo took power, Ivory Coast was rather a model of economic development in Africa...
 
To an extent when France recognised the PRC over the ROC some considered this be a "Franco-Chinese" third block but I think that's a little bit over the top.

Alone by herself France does not have the economic potential to do much more than OTL. Avoiding the depression post 1973 would help and is doable through internal French reforms.

Otherwise the only way to get a third block during the Cold War based around France is through a Franco-British alliance with some European countries and the ANZAC thrown in too.
 
Open hostility.

Sorry, it's not more 2003. you should stop thinking about american and french relations as always hostile...

And I will say now, that recent history proved that the French were right... The real war was in Afghanistan and the USA lost it by going to Irak...

Why France will bother with South Africa ???

Or Latin America ???

Did the French had interests there ??? No !!!

If you looked at french interventions in Africa, it was always in support of western friendly governments, of course most of them being autocratic dictature. French fought a quasi war in Tchad against the Lybians and when the British and American lost a civil plane in Lockerbie, the French lost also a civil plane in an lybian sponsored attacks.

In Africa, iin case of civil wars or military coup, the French were always here to protect every western expatriates. The USA didn't need to send US Marines to protect their citizens in Africa, french soldiers were here for that...

The hot zone of Africa were always in english speaking countries (Liberia, Sierra Leone), or ex english colonies (Soudan), or ex belgium colonies, Zaire, Rwanda...

Only in Ivory Coast, there is a civil war who could turn to a genocidal war but it was stopped when the french destroy Gagbo airforce severals years ago... But until the madman Gagbo took power, Ivory Coast was rather a model of economic development in Africa...

No, I had 1960-70's Franco-American relations in mind. France left NATO, hasn't supported almost any American initiative on the period and had a relatively independent policy. So, that's my point: if the relation is even more distant than OTL, we could have only open hostility.

And about the South Africa and Latin America suggestions, we need to find a scenario for this very very independent France to act. If we don't, how France could be a third party in the Cold War?
 
No, I had 1960-70's Franco-American relations in mind. France left NATO, hasn't supported almost any American initiative on the period and had a relatively independent policy. So, that's my point: if the relation is even more distant than OTL, we could have only open hostility.

As said before, French troops leave NATO integrated command but they don't leave NATO.

The sixties in France were the years of Presidency of De Gaulle and he disliked the games the USA played with him and the Vichy regime.

It was also the years where the USA engaged in a war in Vietnam, Cambodgia and Laos, which was not only a military failure but also a major trauma for US society.

The French know that the Vietnam war will be a failure because the Vietnamese were ready to loose millions of people to have their independance, even if it was under communist dictature. The USA tought they will be able to force people to adopt western way of life and democracy while supporting in the same time a corrupt south vietnamese dictature.

The real possibility to fight communism in Vietnam was in 1954, in 1965 it was too late.

For the rest, after 1962, you have a period of Cold War cold "the Detente" and the USA and the SU negociated severals treaty to reduce the risk of a nuclear war and control the proliferation of nuclear weapons. So with a colder "Cold War", France was able to have a different diplomacy as the USA.

And if two countries become distant, they don't become hostile or ennemy.

You are speaking about South Africa and Latin America, both parts of the world were western allied in the 1960's and the regime of Apartheid didn't become "persona non grata" yet.

And France being a second rate power in the 1960's couldn't be involve in the same time as ally of Israel and support of Françafrique, and somewhere else in the world. French had limited politics and military means...

Even the USA being a superpower in 1960 let the British, the French and the Belge managed their ex colonies in Africa and fought pro communist guerilla there...

In fact, the only way for France to be really hostile to the USA in the 60's was to support communism and it is ASB for De Gaulle to become communist.
 
Last edited:
I was thinking more about this last night and France practically was as independent as it dare be. Yes they left NATO but as pointed out by others this was only superficially. They were always going to form the reserve contingent. At the end of the day France and America are democracies and despite their differences even the French know a Soviet dominated Europe is not a good thing.

What France mainly did in OTL was to form a moral challenge to America's authority and perhaps group other nation around that moral bloc. Most recent example is Iraq, where all of America's goodwill from September 11 basically just evaporated because of their aggression. France was one of the more vocal critics of this policy and one could argue gained a moral victory from their stance. It doesn't mean they're going to send the foreign legion to Iraq to help Saddam.

Also consider the French Military. One of the most capable (if not the most) capable armies in Europe. They are the only Navy other then the US to have a full nuclear aircraft carrier. Also their air force uses good equipment, the Mirage fighter in particular has a good reputation. They've done pretty well OTL.
 
On the South Africa question it should be noted that after Britain embargoed SA the French stepped in and became their largest arms supplier for several years selling them Puma helicopters and Mirage F1 fighters. Without them the SADF's technical advantages over it's neighbours would have narrowed more quickly, this would have had major implications in Angola.

The French until recently had a pretty "ethics blind" arms export policy. For years it was a bit of a given that in a major international crisis the "bad guys" would be flying Mirages! Especially with the Mirage F1 the policy seemed to be "if the Americans won't sell to this lot then we will!" This gave them a nice little niche to exploit and it's demise with the end of the Cold War is attributed to the Rafale's lack of export orders to date as former Mirage customers can now buy American. The French also sold Iraq the Osirak reactor at a time when Saddam was apparently openly boasting of developing "an Arab Atom Bomb" and the Soviets were not prepared to do that.

So even IOTL the French were prepared to do business with all sorts of regimes without any qualms!!
 
Could the France attract the U.K. to join it, or would the Anglos inevitably be drawn to America? I guess my overall question is, could France have been a second-rate contender in the Cold War on the level of post-Sino-Soviet split China?
 
Top