WI Darlan Defects?

Keep in mind that the following POD will have very few ramifications on the outcome of WWII, that is not what I'm interested in. I'm more interested in the effects on the political future of France.

Now in OTL the fate of Admiral Francois Darlan was quite a near run thing. He left Toulon on November the 7th to visit his son who was suffering an attack of Polio in Algiers. As a result he was in Algiers during the Uprising the following day, and captured by the French resistance in the November 8th Putch. This would lead to him defecting to the allies and subsequently being accepted as Leader of the Free French (sort of) until he was assassinated in December.

But let's say that his son does not have the polio attack? Darlan remains in Toulon during the events of November 8th and is not captured by the Allies. This puts him in a much different position as the Germans execute Case Anton. Instead of meekly calling for the French fleet to defect, Darlan can order his subordinates in person. If anyone had the clout to get the Vichy French fleet out of Toulon, it would be Darlan. So instead of being scuttled in November, the fleet sails out relatively unopposed (a few air attacks, perhaps a few ships sunk) and meets up with the Allies in North Africa.

Now this gives Darlan even more clout than he had in OTL and Eisenhower will no doubt recognize his self-appointment as head of French North and West Africa, and the assumption of the de-facto leadership of the Free French. Darlan will in addition command his fleet while Giraud will command the army. All of this to the dismay of Charles De Gaulle.

Now undoubtedly, there will be an attempt(s) to assassinate Darlan in TTL like in OTL. Lets assume that in TTL for the sake of the scenario, and due to perhaps more security around Darlan himself (say French Marines) these attempts fail. Furthermore let's assume that following the failure of these attempts on Darlan's life, the allies agree to look the other way when Darlan & co. "take care of" the troublesome De Gaulle and recognize Darlan's leadership of the Free French in exchange for him rolling back some of his more fascist policies. None of the allies particularly like the situation, but it's a political expediency, and they weren't all the biggest fans of De Gaulle in the first place.

Now by December of 1942 you've got a much stronger (albeit somewhat divided) Free French force under Darlan (navy) and Giraud (army). The addition of the Vichy French Fleet won't affect things too much ( a few more battleships supporting Husky, Dragoon, D-Day perhaps). How will the invasion of France play out in TTL? Any changes? What about post-war France?
 
I am not sure he would have been weolcomed by the Free French as leader as they had periodically fought him. He was also not liked in Britain whereas De Gualle was merely regarded as an irritant. The resistance in France may not have accepted him as leader especially the Communists

His assassination was never fully explained.The theories include Britain and De Gualle both of whom would have made an attempt if they had been responsible for the actual event. Both had reasons to get him out of the way.

The effect on post war politics if he had survived and become leader? Divisive. The Communists would not have joined in a post war coalition and there may have been civil war. He may have attempted to stop the trial of collaborators which would have resulted in opposition and there may have been attempts to put him on trial. De Gualle would probably have gone into obscurity unless he became the figurehead of an broad opposition coalition
 
Giraud probably would have fallen out of favor, and been replaced by de Gaulle. In June 1940, de Gaulle had led one of the few French contrattacks on the German Amiens Corridor from the south as the Frankforce was driving from the north. This led to his becoming General, and increased his prestige and notoriety in the Allied camp. Giraud was not liked by either Eisenhower, Montgomery, nor Churchill, and Darlan would have probably seen him as a threat. If Giraud was replaced by de Gaulle, then Darlan might have proposed that de Gaulle and part of the FFL go to Britain for Operation Overlord (so that he would not be problematic), while Operation Dragoon would have been a larger Franco-American offensive (mostly French) supported by the Marine Nationale. With more FFL at Sword Beach, and a larger force landing at Nice and Toulon, then the south of France could have well been liberated before the St. Lo Breakthrough, causing the Germans to have to retreat to Eastern France quicker to avoid being cut off by Franco-American forces in the south taking Paris before they could withdraw north of the Seine. If France is liberated faster, then perhaps the Rhine could have been reached by November 1944, then have Market Garden bumped up in 1944 (still may have failed.) With the Allies ready to cross the Rhine in Jan 1945, then the Western Allies may have been able to liberate Czechia before the Soviets could reach Prague. Also, if a larger force landed in Provence in August 1944, then the British Army in Italy could have turned eastward toward Yugoslavia and Austria instead of toward the French border, meaning a possible Allied conquest of Austria, meaning a NATO Austria and maybe even a non-communist Yugoslavia (if the British moved very quickly to reach Sarajevo and Belgrade beforee Feb 1945, then supported the non-Communist partisans.)
 
Giraud probably would have fallen out of favor, and been replaced by de Gaulle. In June 1940, de Gaulle had led one of the few French contrattacks on the German Amiens Corridor from the south as the Frankforce was driving from the north. This led to his becoming General, and increased his prestige and notoriety in the Allied camp. Giraud was not liked by either Eisenhower, Montgomery, nor Churchill, and Darlan would have probably seen him as a threat. If Giraud was replaced by de Gaulle, then Darlan might have proposed that de Gaulle and part of the FFL go to Britain for Operation Overlord (so that he would not be problematic), while Operation Dragoon would have been a larger Franco-American offensive (mostly French) supported by the Marine Nationale. With more FFL at Sword Beach, and a larger force landing at Nice and Toulon, then the south of France could have well been liberated before the St. Lo Breakthrough, causing the Germans to have to retreat to Eastern France quicker to avoid being cut off by Franco-American forces in the south taking Paris before they could withdraw north of the Seine. If France is liberated faster, then perhaps the Rhine could have been reached by November 1944, then have Market Garden bumped up in 1944 (still may have failed.) With the Allies ready to cross the Rhine in Jan 1945, then the Western Allies may have been able to liberate Czechia before the Soviets could reach Prague. Also, if a larger force landed in Provence in August 1944, then the British Army in Italy could have turned eastward toward Yugoslavia and Austria instead of toward the French border, meaning a possible Allied conquest of Austria, meaning a NATO Austria and maybe even a non-communist Yugoslavia (if the British moved very quickly to reach Sarajevo and Belgrade beforee Feb 1945, then supported the non-Communist partisans.)

Pretty ambitious, and presupposes Hitler will cancel the Bulge and not swing more forces West to face a greater western threat. Also, Tito was pretty much seen as Yugoslavia's legitimate leader by this time. The non-communist forces had been completely discredited.

The big question is, how does this affect Yalta? Will FDR still be willing to leave Bohemia and Austria to the Soviets? And how does this scenario allow NATO membership to these two countries?
 
Superficially, one tends to be kinder to Darlan than to other Vichy officials because a) he was not as bad as Pierre Laval and b) he "sort of" defected to the Allies (it's a lot more complicated than that) and was assassinated.

This should not hide the fact that Darlan was hated by the Gaullists and all the Free French, throughout the political spectrum, and not particularly trusted by the Vichy people.

Darlan was before all an opportunist: considered to be loyal to the Republic in 1940 (and the Republic had indeed been generous to him), he defected to Pétain, and when things started to look grim in 1942, and the Germans forced Pétain to sack him and recall Laval, he tried to switch back to the winning side.

I doubt very much that he would have had the guts to take the fleet out of Toulon. That's something a De Gaulle could have done; Darlan was definitely not in the same league.

Assuming he did, and somehow got the Fleet to fight alongside the Allies, and also managed to avoid assassination, he would have had to answer to De Gaulle and De Gaulle would have had nothing to do with him.

I can see Darlan finally arrested, and tried at the Libération, along with Pétain, Laval, etc. He might have escaped the death penalty (his trial would have been interesting, though - I'm sure Laval would have had plenty to say!), but he would certainly have been sentenced to prison and national indignity. No way he could have played any political role in French post-WW2 politics.
 
Darlan is the one who pushed for real collaboration with Germany. He would have been welcomed with opened arms if he had defected in July, 1940, but in November 1942? Roosevelt might have gone for it (after all he liked Vichy better than Free France) but Churchill I'm less sure. And it would only lead to a divorce between the Free French forces and the Resistance groups inside France - playing right into the hands of Communist groups.
 
Giraud probably would have fallen out of favor, and been replaced by de Gaulle. In June 1940, de Gaulle had led one of the few French contrattacks on the German Amiens Corridor from the south as the Frankforce was driving from the north. This led to his becoming General, and increased his prestige and notoriety in the Allied camp. Giraud was not liked by either Eisenhower, Montgomery, nor Churchill, and Darlan would have probably seen him as a threat. If Giraud was replaced by de Gaulle, then Darlan might have proposed that de Gaulle and part of the FFL go to Britain for Operation Overlord (so that he would not be problematic), while Operation Dragoon would have been a larger Franco-American offensive (mostly French) supported by the Marine Nationale. With more FFL at Sword Beach, and a larger force landing at Nice and Toulon, then the south of France could have well been liberated before the St. Lo Breakthrough, causing the Germans to have to retreat to Eastern France quicker to avoid being cut off by Franco-American forces in the south taking Paris before they could withdraw north of the Seine. If France is liberated faster, then perhaps the Rhine could have been reached by November 1944, then have Market Garden bumped up in 1944 (still may have failed.) With the Allies ready to cross the Rhine in Jan 1945, then the Western Allies may have been able to liberate Czechia before the Soviets could reach Prague. Also, if a larger force landed in Provence in August 1944, then the British Army in Italy could have turned eastward toward Yugoslavia and Austria instead of toward the French border, meaning a possible Allied conquest of Austria, meaning a NATO Austria and maybe even a non-communist Yugoslavia (if the British moved very quickly to reach Sarajevo and Belgrade beforee Feb 1945, then supported the non-Communist partisans.)

That's pretty ambitious, but undoubtedly with the extra ships and shipping brought over by Darlan, the war is going to go better for the allies.

Superficially, one tends to be kinder to Darlan than to other Vichy officials because a) he was not as bad as Pierre Laval and b) he "sort of" defected to the Allies (it's a lot more complicated than that) and was assassinated.

This should not hide the fact that Darlan was hated by the Gaullists and all the Free French, throughout the political spectrum, and not particularly trusted by the Vichy people.

Darlan was before all an opportunist: considered to be loyal to the Republic in 1940 (and the Republic had indeed been generous to him), he defected to Pétain, and when things started to look grim in 1942, and the Germans forced Pétain to sack him and recall Laval, he tried to switch back to the winning side.

I doubt very much that he would have had the guts to take the fleet out of Toulon. That's something a De Gaulle could have done; Darlan was definitely not in the same league.

Assuming he did, and somehow got the Fleet to fight alongside the Allies, and also managed to avoid assassination, he would have had to answer to De Gaulle and De Gaulle would have had nothing to do with him.

I can see Darlan finally arrested, and tried at the Libération, along with Pétain, Laval, etc. He might have escaped the death penalty (his trial would have been interesting, though - I'm sure Laval would have had plenty to say!), but he would certainly have been sentenced to prison and national indignity. No way he could have played any political role in French post-WW2 politics.

Though I agree with a lot of what you're saying about Darlan, I think you underestimate his opportunism. Once Darlan realizes that the allies have opted to attack Morocco and Algeria instead of Dakar (where he thought the blow would land) he's going to realize that the whole Vichy France gig is up. With French North Africa in Allied hands there is no way Germany can justify leaving Southern France unoccupied.

Any hopes Darlan had of keeping France neutral along with all his hatred of the English is going to go out the window once he hears of Torch. Again this is basically what happened in OTL, only in OTL Darlan was stuck in Algeria powerless to do anything to affect the situation in Vichy France. I believe that given the opportunity Darlan's going to try and make the best of a bad situation, and bring a strong enough force over to the Allies to ensure a relatively safe position in their ranks. Also bear in mind Darlan's actions in OTL where he tried to do exactly the same thing from Algeria (but failed to do so.) This POD IMHO puts him in a place where he can actually do what he wanted to do in OTL.

Now will this cause problems within the Free French? Undoubtedly, Darlan and De Gaulle are not going to get along period. One of them is going down. The only question is who. In TTL however Darlan may have enough clout that might prevent him from being assassinated as in OTL. Furthermore I think that given the opportunity Darlan's going to do his best to become the leader of the Free French movement, obviously causing friction within the resistance. However when faced with aligning with Darlan or the Communists, I believe most of TTL's Gaullists will align with Darlan.

Darlan is the one who pushed for real collaboration with Germany. He would have been welcomed with opened arms if he had defected in July, 1940, but in November 1942? Roosevelt might have gone for it (after all he liked Vichy better than Free France) but Churchill I'm less sure. And it would only lead to a divorce between the Free French forces and the Resistance groups inside France - playing right into the hands of Communist groups.

Another good point, aligning with Darlan, one of the foremost French collaborators, is going to cause the Allies problems. It did in OTL, making his assassination a very convenient event. However prior to Torch both Churchill and Roosevelt were actively seeking a new leader for Free French, being none too impressed with De Gaulle. Despite his collaboration Churchill said something along the lines of "I may despise him (Darlan) but I'd get down on my knees and kiss his feet if it would bring me that fleet of his."

If Darlan manages to sail the fleet out of Toulon along with as much Vichy personnel as possible, He might succeed in creating such a force that the Allies are forced to deal with him and acknowledge him as the leader of the Free French, especially after TTL's assassination of De Gaulle.
 
Though I agree with a lot of what you're saying about Darlan, I think you underestimate his opportunism.

I do not underestimate Darlan's opportunism, I question his courage and his capacity for grandeur.

Something else: the Free French came from all the political spectrum; their only common point was their refusal of everything Vichy symbolized: the armistice of June 1940, and then the collaboration with the Germans. Darlan was a Vichy man almost from the start. He was instrumental in the Massilia affair. Then he became head of Pétain's government. That's a big difference with people who at one point might have thought that Pétain would be a protector and finally realised that it was not so. So I don't see how Darlan could have been accepted as leader by the Free French.
 
Last edited:
That's pretty ambitious, but undoubtedly with the extra ships and shipping brought over by Darlan, the war is going to go better for the allies.

Not to mention the ground troops that in OTL went Gaullist, but which here might become Darlanist (if there's such a thing).

Though I agree with a lot of what you're saying about Darlan, I think you underestimate his opportunism. Once Darlan realizes that the allies have opted to attack Morocco and Algeria instead of Dakar (where he thought the blow would land) he's going to realize that the whole Vichy France gig is up. With French North Africa in Allied hands there is no way Germany can justify leaving Southern France unoccupied.
Add to that personal ambition. If Roosevelt props him up, he can be Head of the French State.

Any hopes Darlan had of keeping France neutral along with all his hatred of the English is going to go out the window once he hears of Torch. Again this is basically what happened in OTL, only in OTL Darlan was stuck in Algeria powerless to do anything to affect the situation in Vichy France. I believe that given the opportunity Darlan's going to try and make the best of a bad situation, and bring a strong enough force over to the Allies to ensure a relatively safe position in their ranks. Also bear in mind Darlan's actions in OTL where he tried to do exactly the same thing from Algeria (but failed to do so.) This POD IMHO puts him in a place where he can actually do what he wanted to do in OTL.
Darlan's anglophobia pre-1940 is probably mostly a mere convenience flag. After operation Catapult and it's 1,300 dead French sailors, it might be a lot more genuine.

But what Darlan can mostly be depended upon is to lean on the side of the wind. When Germany's strong, he's pro-German; now that America has showed its teeth, he's pro-American. Pro-French is, regrettably, something he has trouble being, whether it's Free France or Vichy. As a French politician once said "it's not the weathercock that's changing direction, it's the wind".

Now will this cause problems within the Free French? Undoubtedly, Darlan and De Gaulle are not going to get along period. One of them is going down. The only question is who. In TTL however Darlan may have enough clout that might prevent him from being assassinated as in OTL. Furthermore I think that given the opportunity Darlan's going to do his best to become the leader of the Free French movement, obviously causing friction within the resistance. However when faced with aligning with Darlan or the Communists, I believe most of TTL's Gaullists will align with Darlan.
I think both would have cards to play.

- de Gaulle could play Churchill and probably a good part of the Resistance (and the 1940-vintage Free French Forces)

- Darlan could play Roosevelt and a probably good part of the ex-Vichy troops.

That most Gaullists would align with Darlan I am not sure of, regardless of their level of irritation with de Gaulle or of dependence on Allied support. It's 1942, they have been sentenced to death by Vichy, have seen their family arrested by Vichy, Resistance networks are being dismantled by Vichy and their leaders are being tortured by Vichy. Free French troops have been fired upon and killed by Vichy. I am not sure they'll be ready to turn the page over and play realpolitik because hey look, it's Admiral Darlan (yes, the same Admiral Darlan who fought us and hunted us down and threatened our friends and families just a few days ago but now he's popular with Roosevelt so he's our leader now).

Another good point, aligning with Darlan, one of the foremost French collaborators, is going to cause the Allies problems. It did in OTL, making his assassination a very convenient event. However prior to Torch both Churchill and Roosevelt were actively seeking a new leader for Free French, being none too impressed with De Gaulle. Despite his collaboration Churchill said something along the lines of "I may despise him (Darlan) but I'd get down on my knees and kiss his feet if it would bring me that fleet of his."
If it's a matter of seizing the fleet (which Churchill would know Darlan cannot deliver from Algiers anyway), I can understand Churchill's sentiment. But for all the bitter quarrels between the two men, and the exchange of angry words and barbed comments, I really cannot imagine Churchill dropping de Gaulle - too many things (and probably too many quarrels as well) have happened between the two of them.

Darlan after all is the man who sort of betrayed the Republic, then wanted Vichy to enter the war at Germany's side against Britain, then betrays Vichy once he falls into the Allies' power. The same Darlan who said, upon learning of Operation Torch : "if the Americans come with two divisions I'll drive them to the sea, if they come with twenty I'll kiss them". It's not exactly as if Darlan had always desired to continue war with the Allies (he pushed hard for armistice), to protect the French Fleet (he accepted the armistice treaty's infamous article 8), or was ready to take risks to ensure an Allied victory (he sought military cooperation with the Reich after all).

So yes, I think his assassination allows almost everybody to let a sigh of relief, from de Gaulle to Churchill.


If Darlan manages to sail the fleet out of Toulon along with as much Vichy personnel as possible, He might succeed in creating such a force that the Allies are forced to deal with him and acknowledge him as the leader of the Free French, especially after TTL's assassination of De Gaulle.
Ah, if it's not a choice between Darlan or de Gaulle, then Churchill might go with it - better Darlan than nobody, although that opens a good many cans of worms with both the Resistance and with the Free French forces.

As for Darlan being able to order the Fleet out of Toulon, I'm skeptical. The Admiral might be in Algiers, but the Admiralty is in Vichy, and I'm pretty Admiral de Laborde got orders from Vichy to stay put since Pétain condemned Darlan's ceasefire in the aftermath of Torch. If anything, it's Admirals de Laborde and Marquis that the Allies should try to win over, as they, as Toulon's commanding officers, are the only ones able to effectively hand over the fleet.
 
I think many people may have a rather mistaken impression of the Free French and its leader De Gaulle.

At the time, Marshal Petain was considered a hero. The man who had saved France at Verdun and more or less did so again in 1940. Sure, conditions in France weren't great after the surrender but it could have been a lot worse so he still had a lot of popular support which only eroded over time.

Also, Petain had been the most important French general during the interbellum, and practically every French officer had served under him at some point. While De gaulle was considered a promising crackpot.

Petain and Darlan had legitimacy in a way De Gaulle didn't have. They also had numbers....in a way De Gaulle never had. The Free French never numbered more than a few thousand troops, mostly individuals. Meanwhile, the Vichy forces (complete units) were slowly building up to fight the Germans again. The commanders in North Africa were actively circumventing armistice regulations to create more troops while General De Lattre de Tassigny in France prepared the remaining metropolitan troops for battle. All with official blessing. In the end, Petain lost his nerve and ordered De Lattre to stand down.

Had Darlan pulled the trigger, that would have blown De Gaulle away as a minor footnote (and mutineers to boot) while the French armed forces joined the allies once again.

The allies would have been unable to pass Darlan after that. Not only would it have made a mockery of their "good guy, democratic" image but Darlan was France's leader in the absence of Petain for the Vichy French.

The OT De Gaulle had to work with Giraud because the bulk of the Vichy French simply refused to cooperate with De Gaulle. The Free French ground forces had to be united in the 2nd Armored Division and sent far away to England because the rest of the army wanted nothing to do with those mutineers.

Only in postwar revisionist history did all French troops become Free French while the entire citizen populace was in the resistance........
 
The OT De Gaulle had to work with Giraud because the bulk of the Vichy French simply refused to cooperate with De Gaulle. The Free French ground forces had to be united in the 2nd Armored Division and sent far away to England because the rest of the army wanted nothing to do with those mutineers.

Ho-kaaaay...
 
Also, Petain had been the most important French general during the interbellum, and practically every French officer had served under him at some point.


Absolutely! Too bad that, as vice-president of the Superior Council of Defense, he was responsible for the doctrinal and tactical errors that lead directly to the defeat of 1940!
 
If you have a different opinion on the amalgamation of the Free French and the Vichy forces, I'd love to hear it.

Otherwise, I'll just refer you to the many books on the subject.

By all means, please do refer me to the many books backing your position. Should be interesting.
 
Well, you obviously have a strong opinion on the issue. Too bad you're not willing to share your reasoning.

Instead of simply listing a couple of books you won't read anyway since the sharing of knowledge doesn't seem to be your thing, may I suggest a few points of interest you might want to study for yourself?


You can start with the aftermath of the British attacks on the French fleet and the response of the average French.

You might also want to study the Syrian-Lebanon campaign of 1941 and especially the numbers of French who switched sides to join the Free French and the number that wanted to be repatriated back to France.

Another interesting subject would be the history of the French 2nd Armoured Division and the explanation why it was assigned to the Americans rather than to the French army command (Army B, later the 1st Army) or even 19th corps in Italy.

You might also check into the history of General Konig of Bir Hakeim fame, practically De Gaulle's senior field commander. He was refused a command in the ex-Vichy French army and given a meaningless staff position in England because too many French officers and men hated him for fighting against them in 1941.


All of this should give you an idea about De Gaulle and his Free French and their position vis a vis Vichy France before the allies won and revisionist history made De Gaulle the undisputed leader of France with every Frenchman either fighting for him or in the resistance.
 
Top