French Foreign Policy Independent of NATO

Let's say that due to (1) the US deciding to make French Indochina independent post-WW2* and (2) the French not getting an occupation zone in Germany the French decide to not join the US alliance structure post-war. They pursue their own strategic foreign policy, even moreso than OTL.

Who would France's friends and partners be? Yugoslavia and Spain come to mind. South Africa?








*If FDR was willing to give the place to Chiang, I don't see why an independent Indochina is that implausible.
 
Who would France's friends and partners be? Yugoslavia and Spain come to mind. South Africa?
I dont know a great deal about this topic, but I do know that all of those countries sound unlikely partners for France. Spain was a fascist dictatorship at this point, and was on bad terms with the third republic, which had been taken over by Nazi Germany during the war, and was politically dominated by those groups that had opposed to the occupation. Indeed, a lot of the Republican exiles ended up in France after the civil war.

South Africa doesnt seem likely it would have much strategic importance to France, plus allying with a regime that supported apartheid would likely be anathema for a western country which was widely regarded as the most tolerant toward blacks at this point.

Yugoslavia is also a probable no, especially in the days before it's break with Moscow. After is unlikely too. Sure, Tito was a less brutal than many of his contemporaries in the Eastern Bloc, but he was still a dictator with fairly repressive tendencies, and that would probably be enough to prevent any western democracy from allying with him.
 
If France would be neutral in de jure it still would be close to Western institutions in fear of Soviet invasion. The similar case in OTL would be Sweden which could work as a partner for France in this timeline. There could be a joint fighter program for instance. Politically I would think that Sweden would oppose the probable colonial wars which France would be part of.

How do you see France's stance in European economical integration? Cooperation between France and West Germany is crucial to get it rolling.
 
... and the French not getting an occupation zone in Germany...
Well this going to have implications. That means no Saar Protectorate–it likely ends up under some sort of organisation similar to the International Authority for the Ruhr (IAR)–which provided a fair chunk of France's immediate post-war coal production, unless they get some sort of separate access agreement/treaty clause it puts a large dent in their re-industrialisation. IIRC the return of the Protectorate helped cement Franco-German reconciliation, Germany will want both areas back so we likely still see the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) being created as a quid pro quo.

Random thought but if France not having an occupation zone is indicative of their standing in the post-war world what's their position at the UN like? As I understand things initially the USSR was hostile to the idea of to granting France a permanent seat on the Security Council with the US not being much more enthusiastic either, it requiring lobbying on the part of the UK to help make it happen.
 
Well this going to have implications. That means no Saar Protectorate–it likely ends up under some sort of organisation similar to the International Authority for the Ruhr (IAR)–which provided a fair chunk of France's immediate post-war coal production, unless they get some sort of separate access agreement/treaty clause it puts a large dent in their re-industrialisation. IIRC the return of the Protectorate helped cement Franco-German reconciliation, Germany will want both areas back so we likely still see the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) being created as a quid pro quo.

Random thought but if France not having an occupation zone is indicative of their standing in the post-war world what's their position at the UN like? As I understand things initially the USSR was hostile to the idea of to granting France a permanent seat on the Security Council with the US not being much more enthusiastic either, it requiring lobbying on the part of the UK to help make it happen.


As part of the general pattern here of "France gets diddly squat and accordingly is very offended" the French not getting a Security Council seat would go well.

It's funny given how the US OTL pushed quite hard for China to be part of the council and also pushed for Brazil to be a permanent member but was skeptical of France being part of the council.
 
It's funny given how the US our timeline pushed quite hard for China to be part of the council and also pushed for Brazil to be a permanent member but was skeptical of France being part of the council.
IIRC that came from the idea of the permanent members taking on a world policeman role to enforce the post-war order – China was to help look after the Far East region and Brazil with South America. Even with their later actions their earlier failures during WWII didn't really make France seem like a good fit for that, plus De Gaulle just annoyed everyone.
 
Top