What if Paris NOT an open city in 1940

Archibald

Banned
Any scenerio with France still in the game just changes world war 2 because the Italians will be out of all of Africa soon and there is no way the Free French will just give up IndoChina to the Japanese without a fight, which means the China war gets more sticky for the Japanese (Supply line through Indochina to China still open) and the Dutch oil is a lot further away. The British can add a infantry division, 100 aircraft and an armored brigade to Malaysia. The Japanese will just have no choice to but to deal with the U.S.

Good point here.Have a look at France fights On ! - it is a good example of this. And the POD is actually early June 1940, when the metropole is already lost ! There are a host of interesting PODs from 1934 to May 1940 that make France standing better against Germany... it is not that difficult, really.
 
Why the Germans would have trouble taking the city (and probably levelling quite badly, not as bad as Stalingrad though), once they have pacified the city, i can see Hitler ordering it razed to the ground.

He did order the razing of Paris. There's even a movie about it called Is Paris Burning?
 
That was in 1944, when he was in the loosing end of the war. It was an "If I can't have Paris, nobody will" kind of order.
 

whitecrow

Banned
Originally Posted by Monty Burns
The result is most likely no Vichy as IOTL - you can't really capitulate if your elected president is somewhere in Paris fighting the invaders. And there's no "surrender monkey" crap, as everybody would remember the heroic defense of Paris.
I doubt it.

Maybe "surrender" will not be included in the steriotype, but I bet Americans still think of French as feminant pussies who can't fight.

I recall a TV interview with an American Vietnam War veteran and he said when he asked his officer what they were doing in Indochina, the officer replied along the lines of "We had to bail out the French in WW1, we had to bail out the French in WW2 and now we have to bail out the French here".

Unless ATL America doesn't enter WW2 or French defeat Germany completly (thus no World War 2 technically) I see Americans developing much the same attitude as OTL.
 
I doubt it.

Maybe "surrender" will not be included in the steriotype, but I bet Americans still think of French as feminant pussies who can't figh.

I recall a TV interview with an American Vietnam War veteran and he said when he asked his officer what they were doing in Indochina, the officer replied along the lines of "We had to bail out the French in WW1, we had to bail out the French on WW2 and now we have to bail out the French here".

10 years after the Indochina War ? Gosh, they're always late...
 
Draw up a decree in my name ordering full-scale resumption of work on the Berlin buildings. . . . Wasn't Paris beautiful? But Berlin must be made far more beautiful. In the past I often considered whether we would not have to destroy Paris But when we are finished in Berlin, Paris will only be a shadow. So why should we destroy it?
Is what Hitler say after his Paris tour. What would he have say if Paris was not a open city would be along the line of destroy it to the ground.
 

Cook

Banned
Its June 1940 President Reynaud of France decides dealing with Hitler is like trying to deal with Genghis Khan or Attila the Hun and that these ain't the Germans of 1870 (he had these kind of thoughts OTL)… he orders General Weygand to defend Paris vigorously … President Reynaud does not resign but remains in the city with the defenders. He tells Weygand that if he won't defend Paris, he will find someone who will.
No Parisian would have had any doubts as to what to expect from a siege. Paris had been besieged within living memory of the city's older citizens and anyone younger would have grown up hearing stories of the terrible conditions experienced during the siege of 1870 when Parisians had been reduced by famine to eating the city’s horses, dogs, cats and finally rats. Added to the prospects of starvation was the new terror of Luftwaffe bombing; Paris be adding its name to the list of Guernica, Warsaw and Rotterdam. And for what? After all the suffering the city would still fall.

In 1870 the morale of the city had been sustained by the hope that fresh French armies were being raised in the provinces and were marching on Paris to relieve the siege. There could be no such hope in 1940; there were not going to be any force coming to relieve the siege. What few troops remained in organised units were too few in number and were streaming back away from the Germans as fast as possible or were in the Maginot Line, already cut off from Paris by fast moving German columns backed by Luftwaffe support. No new armies were going to be raised, what men were available to fight were already enlisted; France had mobilised so many men that they’d severely hindered critical war industries. And there would not be a British army available of any size before 1941 at the very earliest, so there was no possibility of Paris holding out that long.

Any analogy with Leningrad is false. Leningrad was 700 kilometres from German controlled Poland and the Russians had over three months in which to prepare defences for the city. Paris was less than half the distance from the German border and the Germans reached it in twenty-nine days! A more realistic Russian analogy would be Minsk or Kiev; cities that fell quickly.

Every unit sent into Paris to join in a futile defence of the city would be one less unit available with which to build any form of National Redoubt in Brittany or Normandy, locations that made some kind of practical sense because they offered the chance of being reinforced and supplied by the British. Alternatively, they would be one less unit available to be evacuated to French North Africa, from there to slowly rebuild a force that could join the British (and hopefully the Americans) in one day liberating France.

Paul Reynaud was the Prime Minister of France in May 1940, not the President, as such he was the Head of Government, not Head of State. If he had chosen to remain in Paris in some romantic gesture all he would have been doing was decapitating the government of France at a time when leadership was essential. Command and control of French forces outside Paris, to say nothing of the overseas French empire, would have been impossible as soon as telegraph cables out of the city were cut. Reynaud’s would have had nothing to do in the city anyway, Paris had a military governor, General Hering whose responsibility the defence of the city would have been unless replaced by someone else at Weygand’s instruction.
 
The importance of the decision by Reynaud to fight on isn't what happens to Paris, it's that the French government moves to Algiers and continues the fight from North Africa.

When it looked like France was going to lose the war, France sent much of its air force to North Africa to keep it intact, rather than lose it in futile fighting. At that point, France had internalized defeat and was looking at the ways it could best retain as much strength as possible in a future German-dominated Europe. In any scenario where it fights on, France will make very different decisions.

In this case, France will have a substantial air force, its entire navy, and likely be able to evacuate a decent amount of infantry from France into North Africa. France can probably still field an army of around 500,000 to 1,000,000. The gold reserves of both France and Poland at Dakar are available to the Allies. France will still have lost almost all of its manufacturing capability, but US Lend Lease will likely happen earlier and both supply the French Army with any needed equipment and serve as means to industrialize French Algeria more. France will lack a manpower pool of white Frenchmen, but it has access to plenty of black colonials to raise reinforcements or even new formations.

With the French Fleet still active, it will neutralize Italy's fleet and allow Britain more strategic flexibility. The Battle of the Atlantic will turn in favor of the Allies more quickly. Italy will be eliminated from Libya by end of 1940 or Spring 1941 at latest. By end of 1941, the British and French likely have taken Sardinia and Sicily. If Germany still invades the Soviet Union (something I still find likely ITL), then an invasion of Italy in mid 1942 is even possible. After this point, what happens next depends on what other things you think will have happened between 1940-1942.

As for Paris in 1940? The Germans likely surround the city with infantry divisions as the panzers continue to push south. I don't see the Germans attempt to storm Paris until the Allied field armies are driven out. Then weakened by blockade without supply for several weeks, Paris likely falls quickly. Unlike the situation in Stalingrad or Leningrad, there aren't any food supplies coming. There's damage to the city of course, but I don't see Paris being completely ruined. Any commander in Paris at that time would be perfectly justified in surrendering the city to save civilian lives.
 
By the time Paris was reached it was too late for France to hold, and unless the French intend to fight on from Britain and North Africa the lives lost would be pointless. If however they do fight for Paris as a way of delaying the German advance and the Germans don't by pass the city then at the expence of thousands and perhaps tens of thousands of casualties most of the remaining French forces will have time to evacuate to North Africa and Britain.

After the destruction of Paris there will be no Vichy government and any collaberators will be seen for what they are. There would be no prolonged campaign in North Africa as the Italians would be faced with a two front war they cannot win.

With the French Navy still fighting the Italian fleet would be unable to conduct any effective action in the Med and the Royal Navy would have more resources to fight the U Boats and raiders in the Atlantic.
 
By the time Paris was reached it was too late for France to hold, and unless the French intend to fight on from Britain and North Africa the lives lost would be pointless. If however they do fight for Paris as a way of delaying the German advance and the Germans don't by pass the city then at the expence of thousands and perhaps tens of thousands of casualties most of the remaining French forces will have time to evacuate to North Africa and Britain.

After the destruction of Paris there will be no Vichy government and any collaberators will be seen for what they are. There would be no prolonged campaign in North Africa as the Italians would be faced with a two front war they cannot win.

With the French Navy still fighting the Italian fleet would be unable to conduct any effective action in the Med and the Royal Navy would have more resources to fight the U Boats and raiders in the Atlantic.
That is what I think would make sense. I could see a movie on this TTL lol
 
With the French Fleet still active, it will neutralise Italy's fleet and allow Britain more strategic flexibility. The Battle of the Atlantic will turn in favor of the Allies more quickly. Italy will be eliminated from Libya by end of 1940 or Spring 1941 at latest. By end of 1941, the British and French likely have taken Sardinia and Sicily. If Germany still invades the Soviet Union (something I still find likely ITL), then an invasion of Italy in mid 1942 is even possible. After this point, what happens next depends on what other things you think will have happened between 1940-1942.

1942 for an invasion of sicily or sardinia. The LW can fully support Italy until june 1941 and partially as OTL after june 41. France and GB can't win local air superiority before september 1941. The Ada (armee de l air) needs time to expand all her infrastructures in algeria and tunisia : airports, radars, warehouses, oil ....etc. French pilots need training with the US planes. It's the same for the french army : training camps, new TOE at brigade and division levels, new C3 doctrine...etc. FrAnce must build a new army : mechanised and heavy in fire power. They must wait the US air force.
The allies need amphibious operations training : they can't make a big jump on sicily without smalls jumps in the dodecaneses. No Torch = no invasion against a weak opposition : no experience.
1941 : heavy air war over Greece (successful defence of crete. Allied Invasion of Rhodes) commando raid in corsica, greece but France will lose Corsica.
1942 : amphibious operations training and invasion in summer 1942. I think it's optimistic.
 
1942 for an invasion of sicily or sardinia. The LW can fully support Italy until june 1941 and partially as OTL after june 41. France and GB can't win local air superiority before september 1941. The Ada (armee de l air) needs time to expand all her infrastructures in algeria and tunisia : airports, radars, warehouses, oil ....etc. French pilots need training with the US planes. It's the same for the french army : training camps, new TOE at brigade and division levels, new C3 doctrine...etc. FrAnce must build a new army : mechanised and heavy in fire power. They must wait the US air force.
The allies need amphibious operations training : they can't make a big jump on sicily without smalls jumps in the dodecaneses. No Torch = no invasion against a weak opposition : no experience.
1941 : heavy air war over Greece (successful defence of crete. Allied Invasion of Rhodes) commando raid in corsica, greece but France will lose Corsica.
1942 : amphibious operations training and invasion in summer 1942. I think it's optimistic.

You brought up some good points, but you might be too pessimistic. France had plenty of planes on its own in 1940 and was awaiting for delivery of US planes it had already ordered (and which IOTL were diverted to Britain I believe). The Luftwaffe was strong and performed extremely well in the Battle of France, but showed its own flaws in the Battle of Britain. I don't think its superiority in a "Battle of the Mediterranean" can be assumed in 1941.

The French Army needs time to reform and reequip, but it doesn't need much for a limited amphibious campaign in 1941. You are definitely correct on the need for amphibious training, but I don't think it needs to be done in Dodecanese or Rhodes.

France has a base in Corsica. It's ideally suited to invade Sardinia. Airbases there can provide air superiority over Sardinia, and the Allied navies can blockade it. I don't think Sardinia can hold out for very long. Putting troops into Corsica and then crossing the Strait of Bonifacio won't be as difficult as a true amphibious landing. Depending on what forces are in the area, the Allies could grab it as early as before end of 1940. Significant Italian forces would of course push that back.

Sicily will be tougher, and the Allies might need a lot more work to stage a successful invasion. You may be correct that 1942 is the earliest it can be done.
 
The biggest danger for the Allies with the Fench still in the game is that the German army and airforce just drifts south, Italy senses the danger and accepts large scale air and land help in July 1940 and the Axis uses the period of disorganization to try and take Tunisia in the summer and fall of 1940.

In the meantime the Germans roll up to the Spanish border and offer French European territory plus all of French Morroco and part of Algeria as bribes to join the Axis vs. the threat very real of invasion for staying neutral. Do the Spanish join the Axis?
 
The biggest danger for the Allies with the Fench still in the game is that the German army and airforce just drifts south, Italy senses the danger and accepts large scale air and land help in July 1940 and the Axis uses the period of disorganization to try and take Tunisia in the summer and fall of 1940.

The Axis can't ferry troops to Tunisia. The combined French and British fleet will easily prevent any forced amphibious landing by the Axis. It's highly possible that Italy won't even be able to ship troops safely to Tripoli.

As bad as any Allied organization is, France has existing ports and airbases in French North Africa. There are existing war plans by the British and French on how to deal with Italy. There are no Axis plans on sending massive amounts of German reinforcements to Italy. And I don't think any German general will be comfortable having the Italians be responsible for shipping German troops over the water to North Africa under fire by the Allied navies and local Allied air cover.

This could be even worse than Sea Lion.

In the meantime the Germans roll up to the Spanish border and offer French European territory plus all of French Morroco and part of Algeria as bribes to join the Axis vs. the threat very real of invasion for staying neutral. Do the Spanish join the Axis?

This is a good question. On one hand, Hitler can freely offer French territory to Spain without the need to pacify Vichy. On the other hand, Italy and Spain will still have competing war aims that would need to be starightened out. Also, Hitler will still demand German naval and air bases in the Canaries and elsewhere - demands he made IOTL and which Franco refused as an assault on Spanish sovereignty.

Furthermore, Spain can't help the Axis in getting troops to North Africa. The Allied navies still have overwhelming superiority. It's involvement doesn't give the Axis any advantages other than pressure on Gibraltar (which will be meaningless because the Allies will control the southern shore).

Spain essentially gets nothing except the poisoned task of garrisoning French territory (and other than very old claims on some provinces near the Pyrenees, the Spanish have zero claims on any French land). It will lose very quickly Spanish Morocco and the Canaries.

In contrast, Spain knows this is going to be a long war. If France continues to fight there is zero chance of the war ending soon. Spain is very vulnerable to British economic blockade. The Spanish army and navy are in no condition for a real war.

I think Franco will do the sensible thing ITL like he did IOTL. He will sit out the war.
 
The French Army needs time to reform and reequip, but it doesn't need much for a limited amphibious campaign in 1941. You are definitely correct on the need for amphibious training, but I don't think it needs to be done in Dodecanese or Rhodes.

France has a base in Corsica. It's ideally suited to invade Sardinia. Airbases there can provide air superiority over Sardinia, and the Allied navies can blockade it. I don't think Sardinia can hold out for very long. Putting troops into Corsica and then crossing the Strait of Bonifacio won't be as difficult as a true amphibious landing. Depending on what forces are in the area, the Allies could grab it as early as before end of 1940. Significant Italian forces would of course push that back.

Supporting and supplying a large air force group in Corsica will be very difficult for the allies. When the regia aeronautica is free from combat in mainland France, Corsica will be at the top in the list of valuables objectives for Italy. Italia will never let Corsica become the aircraft carrier of the west med before the loss of Sicily.
A conquest of Sardinia will lead to an operation Merkur over Corsica and Sardinia : free crete.

you will find everything in there : A point of departure. APOD France fight on. I think the strategic situation will be the same but Petain/DG fates will be different.
http://francefightson.yuku.com/directory
or in french : http://1940lafrancecontinue.org/
 
Top