Vichy France and decolonization

What's French decolonization going to look like if Nazi Germany wins World War II and thus the Vichy French government survives?

I'm assuming that decolonization would be delayed in this TL, but would it still happen eventually--including for Vichy France?

Also, is Vichy France going to be able to retain any of its colonies (including Algeria, which was a de facto French colony) in the longer-run?
 
It wouldn't decolonization as long as the Vichy government is in charge. Any rebellion going brutal crushed and any area that too rebellious is going be exterminated
 
What about if the Vichy government eventually falls and is replaced by a democratic one?
Yes but Algeria could be retained depending on how willing the French are to keep oppressing the Algerians along with smaller African colonies such as Gabon or the republic of the Congo
 
Last edited:
What's French decolonization going to look like if Nazi Germany wins World War II and thus the Vichy French government survives?

I'm assuming that decolonization would be delayed in this TL, but would it still happen eventually--including for Vichy France?

Also, is Vichy France going to be able to retain any of its colonies (including Algeria, which was a de facto French colony) in the longer-run?
Would Nazi Germany an operating French government with territory and a literal oversee empire to exist - in the long term ?
 
Would Nazi Germany an operating French government with territory and a literal oversee empire to exist - in the long term ?
Considering that Nazi Germany allowed Vichy France to keep its colonial empire in real life, I don't think that Nazi Germany is going to care what France does with its colonies as long as France remains docile in Europe.
 
Yes but Algeria could be retained depending on how willing the French are to keep oppressing the Algerians along with smaller African colonies such as Gabon or the republic of the Congo
Are we likely to see some ethnic cleansing in these regions if they try to rebel against French rule? :(

Also, I wonder if the loss of Alsace, Lorraine, Franche-Comte, and the Nord-Pas-de-Calais is going to make France--even a democratic France if/after the Vichy regime falls--more committed to keeping its overseas empire or at least parts of it.
 
Are we likely to see some ethnic cleansing in these regions if they try to rebel against French rule? :(

Also, I wonder if the loss of Alsace, Lorraine, Franche-Comte, and the Nord-Pas-de-Calais is going to make France--even a democratic France if/after the Vichy regime falls--more committed to keeping its overseas empire or at least parts of it.
The loss of European areas are almost surely going to be fuel for those who want to maintain the colonies. What colonies are left after WW2 depends though. It could be just Algeria, or it could be all of them, probably not Indochina no matter what though. If it's all the colonies then I think you're more likely to see German support, as there'd be resources and strategic basing locations that the Germans would want to remain in friendly hands. But it'd be much harder to maintain in the long term.

Algeria is definitely not going independent if Italy is on the victorious Axis side. Italian Libya and Tunisia, and colonial control of whoever gets Morocco means no independent Arab regimes for the Algerian rebels to base in. It's also likely that some Frenchmen would flee newly German annexed territory, maybe with German encouragement, and will resettle in the colonies, making the demographic balance favor the French more than OTL.
 
The loss of European areas are almost surely going to be fuel for those who want to maintain the colonies. What colonies are left after WW2 depends though. It could be just Algeria, or it could be all of them, probably not Indochina no matter what though. If it's all the colonies then I think you're more likely to see German support, as there'd be resources and strategic basing locations that the Germans would want to remain in friendly hands. But it'd be much harder to maintain in the long term.

Algeria is definitely not going independent if Italy is on the victorious Axis side. Italian Libya and Tunisia, and colonial control of whoever gets Morocco means no independent Arab regimes for the Algerian rebels to base in. It's also likely that some Frenchmen would flee newly German annexed territory, maybe with German encouragement, and will resettle in the colonies, making the demographic balance favor the French more than OTL.
If Britain makes peace in mid-1940, France probably isn't going to lose French Indochina.

Also, France is going to need to have a lot of Europeans settle in Algeria in order to achieve demographic parity with the Muslims there.
 
Where would France get enough settlers from ? Unless there is a general worsening of conditions compared to OTL, sufficient settlers would not be found.
France could get settlers from the French territories which would have been taken by Germany and if Germany would have decided to expel the population of these territories en masse.
 
It depends on Germany's role in the world and what they want.

My opinion is that the main catalyst behind decolonization was not money, but Nazism gave ruthlessness a bad name. If a European power just had to kill people indiscriminately to hold onto power, no one would bat an eyelash (until the Nazis did the same thing to white skinned European Jews and all of the sudden people figured out this was evil.) Even after WW2, we still see this a little bit (like how the US approached bombing people in the countryside of Vietnam and Madaline Alright's heartless statement about the death of 100s of thousands of Iraqis due to sanctions.) Nevertheless, we don't see old-school European ruthlessness. There were no nukes dropping on China after they invaded Korea. Hanoi was not littered with mines and bombed into the ground. Resident populations were not impressed into labor.

In short, if Germany wins and there is a Vichy, then imperialism is not culturally discredited and Vichy can keep it up for a long time.
 
Last edited:
If Britain makes peace in mid-1940, France probably isn't going to lose French Indochina.

Also, France is going to need to have a lot of Europeans settle in Algeria in order to achieve demographic parity with the Muslims there.
Japan could seize all or part of it regardless of whatever European peace is made. It probably depends on how the US reacts to the peace and if Japan deems it necessary for the fight in China.

The French probably couldn't achieve parity, but every French person that lives in Algeria ties the government more to the region, especially if the government has incentivized their settlement.
 
It depends on Germany's role in the world and what they want.

My opinion is that the main catalyst behind decolonization was not money, but Nazism gave ruthlessness a bad name... In short, if Germany wins and there is a Vichy, then imperialism is not culturally discredited and Vichy can keep it up for a long time.
Imperialism as an ideology was discredited long before WW II. Britain had already agreed to eventual independence for India. (Churchill's intemperate opposition to this was a major factor in his exclusion from government in the 1930s.)

And it is silly to argue that Nazi Germany's military defeat somehow "discredited" indiscriminate violence. It was Nazi Germany that was discredited by its indiscriminate violence.
 
Top