The Sword of Freedom: A Franco-British Union TL; Pre TL Discussion

Hello All!

I has been a long time since I want to write a TL on this subject and you will find a little teaser of what I am planning later on. However before committing to regular updates and the like, I want to make sure that I get as much materials as possible from the community before, in the name of accuracy.

Butterflies catchers, be warned that I do plan on having plenty of butterflies by the end of this TL which will hopefully last until the present day. The France and Britain of TTL 2009 will be VERY DIFFERENT and pretty much everywhere.

Here is a rough outline of what I am planning as far as early World War Two is concerned:
-The 16th of June 1940 Franco-British Union Treaty is signed.
-Mediterranean Theatre focus, the hunt for the Regia Marina, the end of the Quarta Sponda
-Consequences in Europe
-Consequences in Asia

Things are a little more vague after the first year of war, in particular there is a biggie:
Will Singapore Fall?

As far as post war is concerned I intend for Europe to be vastly different, the iron curtain will not be in the same place and not necessarily further east.
I do intend for the Franco-British to last beyond the war and the constitutional/political arrangements of the resulting beast will occupy a large place in the TL.

Anyway here is a little teaser:

Some says that history is predetermined and that it is only the work of underlying currents taking place over a long period of time. This however does not account for the most important event of the century, the Declaration of Anglo-French Unity signed on the 17th June 1940 in the small Breton town of Concarneau. Still, some will say that after centuries if not millennia of common history the lands of the British Isles and of France were bound to be part of the same nation and points out to the numerous occasions were this nearly happened during the Middle Ages among other times. In any case, a union of nations in the face of a common enemy was a first in the history of the world and a first which was very close from not happening at all.

It is during the afternoon and early evening of the 16th June 1940 that the fate of France was to be decided. We know for sure that then the French cabinet was divided between voices in favour of ending the war as soon as possible and voices pleading for a continuation of the war from North Africa. The Président du Conseil position was all but easy during that day, yet the man was not down yet as his first decision of firing the Chief of Staff Maxime Weygand showed. The proposal was accepted by 13 to 9 votes and what would subsequently known as the grand déménagement (the great move) put in action.

Reynaud.jpg


France had lost the battle but had not lost the war as the signatures of Paul Reynaud and Winston Churchill on the two page document showed.

doc07p-1.jpg


doc06p-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
The issue with Singapore is rather will French Indo-China fall? With the Japanese as far away as Formosa, Malaya is fairly safe. Since France will be able to deploy units, aided by the British, and wont be as defeatist as the Vichy regime, it will be interesting to see the Japanese response.
Even if they dont get drawn in, the US is going to have to reinforce the PI if a war is occurring next door, so even if Japan get FIC, they might not get much further.
 
I'm not terribly well-versed in WWII technical information, but I'll give it my best shot:

In Europe and Africa, I can only see this being a very good thing. Without the sudden uninvolvement of Vichy France, the Franco-Brits will still have a strong position in the Mediterranean which is really problematic for Italy. In Asia, a similar situation appears for Japan, sure it can expand into Indochina probably, but with the French still able to deploy troops I can't see the Japanese reaching Singapore.

However, just because the Allies are better prepared and actually united does not mean that the war's going to automatically go better for them. For one, I'm not sure how Ho Chi Minh and his followers will react to a France that's still capable of exerting power over them. If the Japanese military establishment shows a little more intelligence they might even be able to co-opt the Viet Minh to help them fight off the French, if they're willing to settle for a puppet state rather than a colony. I have a hard time believing they would, but it would be an interesting twist certainly.

In Europe, I wonder if the Axis, faced with a more able Allied Powers will go on their conquer-spree as OTL. I'm not sure that Italy, faced with a large amount of hostility to the south, will go for Yugoslavia and Greece. Would Germany turn around and launch Barbarossa if they haven't technically forced a French surrender?

And that's just WWII to consider. The post-war world would be very interesting. I wonder if any form of EEC would form? You could make the argument that with the Franco-British example that a more united europe wouldn't be so opposed, but OTOH I'm not sure if Europe would join an organization that, at the time of founding, would be so clearly dominated by the single Franco-British nation. And of course, the Cold War's course could be heavily altered by how WWII goes.

So many possibilities... I shall watch this TL with great interest.
 
If it had been signed 6 days earlier --Italy would propably NOT have joined the war.
As it is Italy may look for a Quick exit.


?Will Germany or Italy be able to take Corsica?

I see a much quicker operation Compass in Italian NAfrica. So Probably no fall of Greece.

No Vichy France - No attempt to make France pay for the War, with Accounting tricks.

With Britain and France as one -- No French Zone in Germany

It is going to be the post war politics to - dissolve v retain this agreement - that will be interesting.
 

Sandman396

Banned
That document is brilliant. It really adds a touch of authenticity to the timeline.

How did you make it?

I think it is actually genuine.

Having done a bit of research it seems that there maybe a document in the British Archives with the same text as this one.
 
Thanks for all the replies :).

The documents are genuine and can be accessed in the UK's National Archives, you can even order copy through their website online.

And that's just WWII to consider. The post-war world would be very interesting. I wonder if any form of EEC would form? You could make the argument that with the Franco-British example that a more united europe wouldn't be so opposed, but OTOH I'm not sure if Europe would join an organization that, at the time of founding, would be so clearly dominated by the single Franco-British nation. And of course, the Cold War's course could be heavily altered by how WWII goes.

So many possibilities... I shall watch this TL with great interest.

I do have firm plans on the post war order in Europe, there will be some kind of EEC analogue which may however very well turn out to be a little bit more than just European shall we say (think Commonwealth). Cold War is still undecided, it might be cooler or it might even turn into WW3 at some point in the 1960s or 1970s.

If it had been signed 6 days earlier --Italy would propably NOT have joined the war.
As it is Italy may look for a Quick exit.


?Will Germany or Italy be able to take Corsica?

I see a much quicker operation Compass in Italian NAfrica. So Probably no fall of Greece.

No Vichy France - No attempt to make France pay for the War, with Accounting tricks.

With Britain and France as one -- No French Zone in Germany

It is going to be the post war politics to - dissolve v retain this agreement - that will be interesting.

As I have said the Mediteranean theatre of operations will play a large part and will be very different from what happened OTL. Crete will for a start NOT fall (Merkur might take place somewhere else instead) and I do plan on having a large Allied presence in the Balkans. What this could mean is a very different Iron Curtain, ie more of Germany to the Soviets but Greece, Yougoslavia, Bulgaria and possibly some kind of South Romania firmly on the Western side.

Expect Germanys' fate post war to be once again different, especially of no collaboration in France means a harsher occupation. Germany could loose territory in the West in addition to the East among other things. The German state created out of the Franco-British zone will be closely integrated to whatever European structures are put in place, depending on how things turn out to be this might mean no deutschemark.

The Franco-British Union WILL LAST after the end of the war, under a loose federal arrangement where both parliaments are kept in place among other things and with very few powers shared at the highest possible level. I do intend to have some kind of "unification" taking place in many levels, but it will be a gradual one more decided along lines of "hey this works in France/Britain, so lets do it here as well" rather than through directives from the top a la European Union.
 

terence

Banned
Would the French really have carried on fighting? Less than 3000 Frenchmen voluntarily joined de Gaulle in 1940, slightly less than voluntarily joined the SS Charlemagne Division.(Yes I know that the history books say 7500 in July 1940, but the rest were Senegalese and Morroccans picked up at Dunkirk.)
All French military men think that they are either God or Napoleon ( except de Gaulle who thought that he was both), so maybe there would have been a lot of little Napoleons in the colonies.
Neither Britain or de Gaulle had much luck with the French until Torch. They shot back in Dakar, they shot back in Syria and they shot back in Madagascar--not a lot, but enough to show that they were not on the allied side. The French didn't need the sinking of the French fleet to hate the British---they are born that way.
 
Would the French really have carried on fighting? Less than 3000 Frenchmen voluntarily joined de Gaulle in 1940, slightly less than voluntarily joined the SS Charlemagne Division.(Yes I know that the history books say 7500 in July 1940, but the rest were Senegalese and Morroccans picked up at Dunkirk.)
All French military men think that they are either God or Napoleon ( except de Gaulle who thought that he was both), so maybe there would have been a lot of little Napoleons in the colonies.
Neither Britain or de Gaulle had much luck with the French until Torch. They shot back in Dakar, they shot back in Syria and they shot back in Madagascar--not a lot, but enough to show that they were not on the allied side. The French didn't need the sinking of the French fleet to hate the British---they are born that way.

I beg to disagree here, there is plenty of evidence that a good part of the French army was willing to fight on. It is only the personnality of Marshal Petain which turned the tide decisively in favour of the armistice.

Most of the French prisonners were ony picked up by the Germans during the lull between the 17th June and the 22nd June. During that time the French Army fought against Italy in the Alps and the Navy performed some operations against the Italians such as the shelling of Genoa in the same time.

Now does a Franco-British Union means absolutely no collaboration in France, no it does not since it is pretty much a given that the Germans would try to prop up a Quisling type government.
 
Wow... best timeline I've seen in a while. How long is this going to go on for? Just up to the end of the war, or to the end of the Cold War?
 
Wow... best timeline I've seen in a while. How long is this going to go on for? Just up to the end of the war, or to the end of the Cold War?

This is only a discussion before the timeline itself start, since I want to make sure that I have enough materials before starting up properly.

The timeline will last until the present day ie 2009 :D
 
Dunois

Sounds very interesting. I know there are a number of French fights on TLs but not aware of any where Churchill's idea is actually accepted. Could make for a greatly different world war and of course afterwards.

What will be the constitutional position of the British monarch? That could be a problem with a unified, even if largely federal state.

I feel another subscription coming on.;)

Steve
 
Dunois

Sounds very interesting. I know there are a number of French fights on TLs but not aware of any where Churchill's idea is actually accepted. Could make for a greatly different world war and of course afterwards.

What will be the constitutional position of the British monarch? That could be a problem with a unified, even if largely federal state.

I feel another subscription coming on.;)

Steve

The British monarchy will still exist as a monarchy within the greater framework of the Franco-British union. Basically the structure I have in mind for the Franco-British union, is one of a union of nations whereby every member country (and there might be more than just France and Britain post 1950s), keeps its institutions intact including its own parliament and executive. Most powers are devolved to the "national" level including things like education, healthcare and the like.

At the "union" level there is a unionwide Prime Minister and a unionwide parliament made up of the SAME members as the national parliaments. Basically the MPs sits for a three week period in their own national parliament and then one week in the union parliament to discuss union related matters such as defense and foreign affairs. That will be the setup at first, things may very well evolve with time however and the possibility does exist for the Franco-British Union to change its constitutional framework into a fully feldged federal state by 2009.

Once the war is over expect to see a large place given to the political debates about the reforms to be put in place in both countries post war. Basically, OTL post 1945 the Welfare state was put in place in France and Britain by both governments but the reforms were first mooted during the war by Churchill in Britain and by the Conseil National de la Résistance in France. TTL expect all of this to have a strong "Franco-British" blend and so some might propose something along the line of a Franco-British NHS. On the other hand expect to see some pretty radical ideas along the line of "we will never be able to organise something along Franco-British line, so lets devolve everything to the lowest possible level instead" (ie proto Thatcherism).

Expect to see posts on the long term cultural consequences of the union as well (I already have some fun ideas food wise :D). The Franco-British economy will be also vastly different from OTL and suffering from less war weariness. France will get her Trente Glorieuses, but since Gaullism and dirigisme will be butterflied away, strong growth might kickstart even earlier than OTL, on the other hand some well known OTL French brands might fall prey very early on to British competition as well ... As far as Britain is concerned, I do plan to butterfly away the economic malaise of the 1960s and 1970s.

Expect a Franco-British nuke earlier than OTL and also a different development of nuclear technology in both countries.

The TL is just in preparation stage at the moment and if you guys could give me advice and sources to look at, that would be great!
 
Top