WI FDR recognizes HO Sept 45

Suppose Roosevelt survived until the Fall and he (STRONG ANTI COLONIALIST) recognized HO cHI Minh's declaration of independence.

What does it mean for other decolonizations?

How bad are US French relations?

Does Vietnam join the Soviet, Chinese or US Sphere. I could see him as an Asian Tito, is that too optimistic.

Oh and does it totally change US Politics from 64-76 and later?
 
Perhaps combine it with a more brutal Japanese repression of the French officials on March 9th 1945 with more of the French administrators murdered making any Post war French Attempt at administrating the country that much more difficult

Also the British who initially arrived to take over from the Japanese saw that Ho Chi Minh was the effective power in the countryside and simply worked with his organisation (and 'politely asked' nationalist Chinese forces - who had also arrived to leave - which Ho Chi Minh appreciated as in his words "It took 1000 years to get rid of them last time") - this simply in order to feed people, remove Japanese forces etc

OTL the British and Ho Chi Minh worked well together but when the French arrived things changed for the worse and the British "backed right off" not wanting to get involved. With a later French Arrival the British work with the Vietnamese for longer giving Ho Chi Minh's 'Government' much more Legitimacy

Lastly with FDR still in charge there is very likely less US support for French Officials trying to get back to FIC and by the time they 'arrive' Ho Chi Minh with British and US Support has an effective government administration up and running having swept away the previous French system making it virtually impossible for France to re-control the country.

There how did I do?
 
Ho Chi Minh is gonna to have better anti-communist credentials to earn the trust of the United States. He was one of the founder of the French Communist party then later the Indochinese one. And he worked as an Comintern agent as many years. Did many other shady things. But many of his biographers can't agree what really happen during those ''lost years'' so it's up for debate. All of that would have made US policy makers too wary to support him. Maybe if he was more like Syngman Rhee. Maybe, if some many more notable anti-communist Viet nationalists like Diem or so rallied around him and those people told US policy makers he is trust-able despite being a communist or a far left activist.
 
He could have easily Tito'd with some US support, which potentially would have led to Tito not splitting with Moscow/being blocked as an unintended consequence. The butterflies would be pretty big throughout Asia with this change.
 

Archibald

Banned
Can't be worse than OTL. Whatever butterflies thirty years of Vietnamese, French, American and Chinese pain, death, blood, suffering, plus fucking Pol Pot...
 

Archibald

Banned
I can tell that most French voters would happily throw Indochina under a bus, either in 1946, 1950 or 1954. There wasn't the same attachement as per Algeria.Not at all. For the average French in 1954 or 1958 or even 1961, losing Algeria was like losing Brittany or Corsica - NO WAY

There was a red line there and De Gaulle volte-face ("je vous ai compris" my ass !) nearly had him killed twice by the OAS (Petit Clamart plus another place)

Indochina was far far away, there were not many colonists. Considering the maddening instability of the 4th republic post-WWII France would be much better without the Indochina war. It was a financial burden. I wonder if Algeria would erupt before 1954. The seed was planted from May 8, 1945 and the Setif massacre.
 
Last edited:
He could have easily Tito'd with some US support, . . .
Yes, I guess just straight-up economic development. And an oil deal where we get 53% of the profits (buried way deep in the details!) and we 'allow' Vietnamese officials to aggressively negotiate to where they're getting about 53% of the profits.

And what's in it for us? They'd be in our sphere of influence. Or, if we're a little smarter we might anticipate that Vietnam will be one of the leaders of a nonaligned movement which effectively is the same thing, only better since we'll receive much less of an anti-colonial backlash.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
I can tell that most French voters would happily throw Indochina under a bus, either in 1946, 1950 or 1954. There wasn't the same attachement as per Algeria.Not at all. For the average French in 1954 or 1958 or even 1961, losing Algeria was like losing Brittany or Corsica - NO WAY.There was a red line and De Gaulle volte-face nearly had him killed by the OAS in Petit Clamart.
Indochina was far far away, there were not many colonists. Considering the maddening instability of the 4th republic post-WWII France would be much better without the Indochina war. It was a financial burden. I wonder if Algeria would erupt before 1954. The seed was planted from May 8, 1945 and the Setif massacre.

I wanna hear this from a French guy before I believe it. sorry. I mean fair point that Algeria was a much bigger deal than Indochina, but it doesn't mean there wasn't sentiment about Indochina. OTOH, how much did France flip out over getting ousted by Anglo-American-native pressure from Syria and Lebanon. Doesn't seem too much.
 

Archibald

Banned
I wanna hear this from a French guy before I believe it.
sorry. I mean fair point that Algeria was a much bigger deal than Indochina, but it doesn't mean there wasn't sentiment about Indochina. OTOH, how much did France flip out over getting ousted by Anglo-American-native pressure from Syria and Lebanon. Doesn't seem too much.

French mandate over Syria and Lebanon was over by 1946, without too much regrets. Considering the ongoing clusterfuck there, getting out as fast as possible was pretty reasonable.

By the way - by September 1946 Uncle Ho was ready to negociate an honourable sortie for the French. Leclerc could have done it by early 1947, but unfortunately his predecessor Admiral Thierry D'Argenlieu sunk any hope.
In November 1946 that idiot send French navy ships shelling Haiphong, killing dozens, a move which send the Vietnamese communist mad and got them into insurrection mode.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_cruiser_Suffren
 
Last edited:
People often say the French were fighting to retain old colonial empire in Indochina. That isn't exactly true, France did go to great length improve the rights of its colonial subjects( at least on paper) and did away with the Indigénat status which limited rights. The hope was that all of overseas colonies would one day become the provinces of France and enjoy equal rights as Frenchmen to create a new greater France composed of its territory all over the world. The project was scrapped due to the failure to win wars of decolonization. Otherwise known as the French Union.

It would be cool to see something like this. That incident in 46 was probably the final nail for the project in Indochina.

Faithful to its traditional mission, France desires to guide the peoples under its responsibility towards the freedom to administer themselves and to manage their own affairs democratically; eschewing all systems of colonization founded upon arbitrary rule, it guarantees to all equal access to public office and the individual or collective exercise of the rights and freedoms proclaimed or confirmed herein.
http://www.equalrightstrust.org/ertdocumentbank//Preamble 1946 ENG.pdf

From the constitution of the Fourth Republic.
 
Top