WI: France really fights on from 1940?

[Deleted member 1487]

The DG10/42 Plan, or whatever name you want to use for a July-August attack, had a important feature. A five day bombardment of the island. This does waive away any serious secrecy for the operation. Best case the Brits are some 36 hours away in surface ship time. A more deliberate sortie can mean 48 hours. That has Cunninghams fleet from Alexandria showing up as the Italian bombardment force is readying for its third day of bombardment. Maybe they hang around to fight, maybe they avoid battle, but either way the bombardment is disrupted for a few days if not permanently. Of course Cunningham can't hang around long & retires east to replenish fuel & ammunition for several days. Cant then the Italian invasion force 11 hours or 24 hours away rush in? Perhaps, but to the west there is Force F at Gibraltar which is 55 to 65 hours away. Maybe Cunningham has held back a extra day for coordinated attack by his fleet & Force H. Or perhaps by chance or design the two play tag team. Then there is the question of if the Italians have the bad luck to kick off their attack after Force H returned to Gibraltar to refuel. That group had been doing something or other off the African coast & was back in latter July. After all that there is a French fleet harbored in NW Africa & lacking anything more important to do than fight the Italian fleet.

Here's the thing about that, the Italians had been bombing Malta from day 1 of their intervention:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Malta_(World_War_II)#Italian_air_actions
So it doesn't seem like that was any signal to the British an invasion was imminent (though if there were plans I'm sure British intelligence and SigInt would probably tip them off) or at least that they took any effort to seriously help the island. It was only in July when the island wasn't seemingly facing invasion that it finally was reinforced with fighters to protect it and the nucleus of offensive forces actually only ended up in Malta by accident and started attacking Italian targets on their own initiative, which convinced the British to reinforce them. Based on the OTL history of events it seems the British weren't about to risk helping Malta in June and even the naval strike aircraft that fled to Tunisia wouldn't feel the need to move to Malta out of concern from the French armistice, so wouldn't be there ITTL. Which basically leaves Malta effectively undefended by the sea and air until July.

But again I don't see the POD to convince the Italians to risk it, if anything the weakness of Malta probably convinces them as IOTL that Malta was so unimportant that it would be a waste of resources to even bother invading and could be either bombed into submission or at least neutralized and become a prison colony for British forces there. Plus Mussolini expected Spain to join the war and close the Mediterranean, strangling supplies to the island and rendering an invasion even less necessary.

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

Why return to Gibraltar to refuel when there are several ports in FNA they can now used. I believe the RN had used them before the fall of France in OTL.

Cunninhams HQ was at Alexandria & he had the Eastern Med fleet. He could slip on west to one of the French ports, but that would leave Brit sea traffic in the eastern end weakly defended. Force F was @ Gibraltar & Force H was off West Africa for a portion of this time. Those two groups could refuel in French ports, but the Eastern fleet needs to drop back to Egypt to replenish.

 

[Workable Goblin]

So it doesn't seem like that was any signal to the British an invasion was imminent (though if there were plans I'm sure British intelligence and SigInt would probably tip them off) or at least that they took any effort to seriously help the island.

Bombing isn't the same as a naval bombardment; the latter would be quite a step up from the more or less desultory air actions, and surely would be quite rapidly recognized as a major escalation. You might still be right that they would decline to take action, but I think the British would recognize the Italians sailing up battleships and shelling the island as being something different.

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

So does that mean the ground combat arms get left behind and the evacuation is mostly specialists? That screws the French in yet another way.

Where did I say that? The priority was to the specialists, Whatever field forces made it to evacuation ports would have a chance. There were still 50,000+ men of 1st Army in Britain when the Armistice came. Those could eventually be returned to Africa. Or if needed organized in the UK.

Of course the situation after the armistice IOTL isn't necessary helpful ITTL, because the evacuation never happened

Actually it did. Orders were given to start on the 17th June & all three services were busy embarking and getting shiploads of men & kit off to Africa. Over 300 aircraft were flown across & both equipment & personnel were already at sea when the Armistice shut it down. Post Armistice the Germans and French argued about evacuated material to be returned.

I have no doubt the French could put together at least 100 or more bombers as of July ITTL, especially given that they were prepping those American aircraft in North Africa anyway, the question is whether they'd have 100, 200, or 500 or so total operational aircraft able to be supported for operations against the Italians and potentially later the Germans and Spanish. Plus of course how many men actually capable of fighting infantry units and how effective those units would be.

Much of that has been addressed in this thread. I agree the French have problems, but they have some advantages as well, the largest being a robust aircraft supply from the US that is already delivering. This is something they lost the instant the Armistice was signed. The Italians have some substantial problems as well. The surprise DoW left them not even half mobilized when the Armistice came, & their leadership problems made the French look like Prussians. Neither are the French fighting alone here, the Brits are a major part of the equation, particularly in the first weeks. When the Italians are still very disorganized.

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

Bombing isn't the same as a naval bombardment; the latter would be quite a step up from the more or less desultory air actions, and surely would be quite rapidly recognized as a major escalation. You might still be right that they would decline to take action, but I think the British would recognize the Italians sailing up battleships and shelling the island as being something different.

Indeed. if I am reading the outlines of the Italian plan the five day preparation included a naval bombardment force.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

Where did I say that? The priority was to the specialists, Whatever field forces made it to evacuation ports would have a chance. There were still 50,000+ men of 1st Army in Britain when the Armistice came. Those could eventually be returned to Africa. Or if needed organized in the UK.

Where you said combat units were too far away and specialists were prioritized for evacuation. Having a chance is different than having priority, which would mean the infantry get left behind if there are limited spots. 50k men help, but it would take time to ship them to North Africa and organize them into combat units; they may well end up staying in Britain to help defend against potential invasion for a while too.

Actually it did. Orders were given to start on the 17th June & all three services were busy embarking and getting shiploads of men & kit off to Africa. Over 300 aircraft were flown across & both equipment & personnel were already at sea when the Armistice shut it down. Post Armistice the Germans and French argued about evacuated material to be returned.

Good to know, where do you find that info?

Much of that has been addressed in this thread. I agree the French have problems, but they have some advantages as well, the largest being a robust aircraft supply from the US that is already delivering. This is something they lost the instant the Armistice was signed. The Italians have some substantial problems as well. The surprise DoW left them not even half mobilized when the Armistice came, & their leadership problems made the French look like Prussians. Neither are the French fighting alone here, the Brits are a major part of the equation, particularly in the first weeks. When the Italians are still very disorganized.

Sure, which is a long term gain, one which no one has denied. The problem is how quickly that could be made useful. The Italians absolutely had a host of issues thanks to Mussolini's timing and strategy, but they still had their homeland. The Brits are actually a lot less help in 1940 due to the need to reorient their defense of the home isles and having little in place in Egypt other than parts of the fleet to really do anything for a while. Long term the advantages are potentially with the Allies, but the loss of France created a ton of problems that would take them months to recover from. It would be a race to see who could capitalize from the new strategic realities first.

The Italians would have course have a devil of a time trying to do so and I think Malta is a red herring. OTL, and there is no reason ITTL why that would change, Malta wasn't really a priority and would be even less of one ITTL given the threat of the French in Tunisia. Given that the Italians had oriented their forces in Libya primarily against Tunisia and that that colony was always their dream territory, while Corsica also needs to be dealt with, they have their hands full and focused elsewhere. IMHO Tunisia becomes a front quickly once it is clear the French are fighting on, perhaps as early as late June, but more probably July, with Corsica getting the full attention of the Italian navy, air force, and any deployable infantry. Egypt is an afterthought given how little of threat it was, while Greece probably doesn't even enter into Mussolini's mind at this point; French territorial goodies/threats are simply too important to ignore.

In terms of what the Italians get, do we think it is likely they end up with the territory they got in 1942 when Vichy was dissolved?

Plus any idea how long it would take for Corsica to be taken?

 

[arctic warrior]

Calabria have been mentioned as have Op. Pedestal - now add the MN to the RN Med. forces. Use this to A) secure withdrawal from France to NA and B) keep the RM off their back.
The Med isn't Norway there are space for warships to manoeuvre in not a confined fiord so less losses from air attack. With only two Italian BBs available the RM will have a hard time doing anything to the Allies in Mussos Lake!
Of course there will be more LW units in place in southern France at least till the fighting ends there though KG 30 the anti-shipping Experten were in the Low Countries but could have been sent south in the event of more fighting there and a need to do something about the MN. Add RA bombers without torpedoes.
I'd venture the French will pull of the withdrawal though with losses of course.

With a week or two to redeploy LW fighter units and several to redeploy bomber units there will be a lull in the air till Hitler decide to go BoB or reinforce Benny. In the latter case add more weeks to redeployment except of course in case of Corsica should the French decide to defend the place.

As I already stated in an earlier post Corsica was defended by two Demi-brigades of 7 and 5 battalions with fortress artillery but little transportation which anyway would be hampered by the single pass to cross east-west in the mountains. There's only one partially flooded or at least swamped airfield at Ajaccio. Not of much use for a Crete Ju-52 touch-down unload troops get airborne. Time to take out Crete a few days if the Allied navies doesn't stop you! A Fallschirmjäger regiment and an Italian battalion could be dropped if the transports are available but risk getting cut off.
All depends how much the French are willing to defend the island.

 

[Logothétes]

Would Barbarossa take place in such a scenario? I know all logic and war strategies dictate 'no', but Hitler is stil Hitler...

 

[arctic warrior]

Ok - Hitler decide to go for France as outlined in Mein Kampf! The Italians are no real help during the summer of 1940 until the VVs have their issues worked out.
There is a possibility of taking out Libya fast if the Allies are speeding up. The French NA Army should be able to defeat the Italian 5. Army in Tripolitania once that happens have O'Conner reinforced by mobile parts of the Army of Levant overrun 10. Army in Cyrenaika.
With no BoB Hitler would focus all on taking out the French. OTL he informed Musso on 19. January 1941 that German troops would be sent to Libya the first ones leaving Naples on 8. February 1941 arriving on the 11. February.
If the French withdrawal have completed on say 15. August 1940 the first German troops would leave Italian port some three weeks following as early as 5. September depending on how much resistance Musso put up. Following the arrival of German troops in Libya the Allies will intensify convoy hunting to prevent further reinforcements though the campaign will still draw on longer than O'Conners two months unless the Allies move early which they probably won't..
If the Germans wants to draw off heavy RN units into the Atlantic they only have the BC Scharnhorst and Gneisenau available Bismarck only becoming operational by January 1941 though RN East Med. squadron and MN should be enough to hold the fort in case.
Loads of Luftwaffe units would stay in Southern France and others go to Sardinia and Sicily though still a substatial force would be needed the guard the Brits at home. Quite a number of threads around here seems to indicate that Rommel was running his campaign on a shoestring - add more troops and the Axis might not be able to supply them except by air.
The Allies should be able to hold their own in NA and clear it by 1941 of Axis forces.

The focus on the Med may well make other parts of WWII play out differently; Yugoslavia may not change government. Greece may not be invaded by Musso though if Germany runs the Libyan show he just may decide to do something in the Balkans to get glory! Or the Hungarian-Romanian conflict may get a different broker than Germany-Italy like Uncle Joe.
With Japan playing it safe the Tripartite Pact may not happen making Stalin feel much safer.

 

[mottajack]

I've spoken with the FTL authors and red their website (I read French currently)

Some crucial points about the FTL (sorry I can't read the entire 17 pages of this thread)

1- Reynaud grows a spine after the FTL authors got ride of two toxic personalities that poisoned his will OTL (and kept De Gaulle at arm length) Helene de Portes and Paul de Villelume. They put the two into a car and crashed it *early* June (for De Portes, it is merely a change from OTL: she died in a car wreck LATE june OTL, with Reynaud the driver).

2 - De Gaulle and Pétain face each other circa June 13, with all the French politicians of the era around them. De Gaulle carries the day, Pétain is so angered he blow an aneurysm and died on 7, September 1940 (he can't be evacuated to AFN in his shape, so it is Laval and his cronies that bury him... in Verdun, with all the poilus of 1917-18)

3 - Reynaud sticks as chief of the government and order the fight for the Métropole to continue, although it lost. Whatever weapon, tanks, gun, aircraft in the depots is thrown into the battle - even utterly obsolete, it will get sacrificed to slow down the German juggernault. and it works: Banyuls (near the Spanish border, on the Mediterranean side) falls on August 7, 1940. The Germans lost 67 000 men and 1500 aircrafts, BoB is a piece of cake compared to OTL.

4 - Between June 15 and August 7, happens Le Grand Déménagement. Basically: every useful thing that can be removed from France and send to Algiers... is moved. The politicians, the industry, the gold, the banks, the most modern side of the army, the government, and the kitchen sink. Aircrafts and boats transit via Corsica, which become the last bit of Métropole in the hands of Algiers (more on this later)

5 - Mussolini gets his ass thoroughly kicked everywhere in Africa. No Afrika Korps to save his soul, with a spectacular, huge butterfly compared to OTL. Basically, the fight in Africa is over by October 1940... instead of June 1943;

6 - So where does Rommel and AK goes ? to the Balkan, with Monty of course. And General Henri Giraud, obviously not a competitor to De Gaulle in this universe. But a well respected military hero. Bottom line: all the blood shed in North Africa OTL is shed instead in Greece, Albania and the Balkans. As "Albania Korps" sounds very lame, Rommel goes for "Skanderberg Korps" instead.
Meanwhile the French, British and Italian navies fight each others to death in the Mediterranean, which become a battleship, cruiser, carrier, destroyer graveyard - a giant Ironbottom Sound. Bretagne, Provence and Lorraine fights Littorio at the cost of Bretagne.
In May 1941 MN Richelieu kicks Bismarck ass in a memorable fights after poor HMS Hood suffers the same fate as OTL (and Prince of Wales is nowhere to be seen ). The Algerie heavy cruiser crushes Prinz Eugen.

7 - What happens to Corsica ? Well, Operation Merkur and its Sturmjaggers somewhat never land in Crete but... in Corsica. And in February 1941. The Italian Navy, Luftwaffe and its X Fliegerkorp prove too much for the Armée de l'Air, RAF, RN, FAA and French Navy which endure severe losses, including the brave old Bearn aircraft carrier. The battle last a month but in the end Corsica is lost early March, and with it, the last bit of Métropole.

8 - Franco will not attack, because his country is ruined, and because he was an extremely cautious man - no Mussolini by any mean. And if Hitler wants to pull a Napoleon and attack Spain, then he will bleed himself to death on that rocky, mountainous, dry country, particularly in July and August. Only to get his ass kicked in Gibraltar from the French and British forces massed in North Africa, only... 10 miles away.

9 - Vichy France never goes to Vichy, as the entire Métropole fought against Hitler up to the Spanish border. Pétain is comatose, then died, but of course Pierre Laval is the same old moron as OTL, and his damned souls Darnand, Déat and the others. They get a NEF - New French State - in Paris, except it is a rump state ruling a scorched earth and ruins France. As per OTL, Hitler doesn't give a rats about NEF, obsessed as he is by the Soviet Union.

10 - Except that, since the Mediterranean theater explodes in his face much earlier than OTL, he has to postpone Barbarossa by 11 months, to May 17, 1942, with obvious results - the Soviets do far better and stops him a loooooong way from Stalingrad and Caucasus and Moscow.

11 - The Indochina and Thai issue: no FIC invasion in spring 1941. Still some things never change: that old, boiling up China and Pacific feud between Japan and America is still happening, Japan is still willing to deny reality and provoke the U.S juggernault. In the end Pearl Harbor happens as per OTL, but the Pacific war takes some marked different twists along the way. In a splendid irony of History, the French and Vietnamese ambush the Japanese, guess where ? in Dien-Bien-Phu, of course.
The resistance in FIC, even limited, change Singapore fate temporarily (it still falls but weeks later) and then Singapore resistance... hits Douglas McArthur immense ego head-on, and he sticks into Bataan and dies there after a nightmarish, futile resistance.

12 - 1942 is spent fighting bitterly in the Balkans, Greece (Crete never falls: Corsica sacrifice was not in vain).

13 - D-days happens much earlier, and in reverse. Normandy, June 1944 doesn't move but... take place of Dragoon as the SECOND landing... the first one happening 11 months earlier than OTL, September 6, 1943, same place as Dragoon - Southern France around Toulon and Marseille. Basicaly France own landing (OTL Dragoon) is moved forward and becomes the main effort, since france stays in the war.

14 - France has little industry in Northern Africa and by late 1941, all the military gear saved from 1940 is gone or worne out. Uncle Sam, the arsenal of democracy, fill the gap, thanks to Lend Lease. Dewoitines are replaced by Mustangs, LeO by B-25s, French B-24s fly out of Crete to smash Ploesti with RAF and USAAF help, of course. French tanks are build in Savannah, as planned before WWII.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

snip

POD aside, basically a lot of wishful thinking and some occasional realism thrown in to make it not pure ASB.

 

[mottajack]

Bollocks !

 

[John Farson]

Bollocks !

Oh, if you want bollocks, check out some of the stuff one of the original, non-French contributors wrote, wanking the Japanese, the Italians... basically the Axis as a whole to extremes. It was as if France staying in the war and not be replaced by Vichy would have been worse for the overall Allied war effort.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

Oh, if you want bollocks, check out some of the stuff one of the original, non-French contributors wrote, wanking the Japanese, the Italians... basically the Axis as a whole to extremes. It was as if France staying in the war and not be replaced by Vichy would have been worse for the overall Allied war effort.

In some ways it might have been depending on whether it prevents to really stupid stuff the Axis did. If Japan doesn't think it can get away with moving on Indo-China, that saves them from the US sanctions that resulted from doing so IOTL. French continued belligerency prevents the Italians from moving on Egypt and probably Greece. There is also an argument it might prevent Barbarossa in any year too. The Battle of Britain and Blitz might well not happen either if Hitler feels the need to finish off the French in North Africa. Nothing is guaranteed, but it is quite possible that continued French belligerency forces the Axis to make less stupid decisions than IOTL.

 

[mottajack]

wiking: my post tried to summarize what amounts to thirteen years of forum discussions by a hundred of members plus two books 800 pages thick. A third volume is well underway.
The FTL has been wargamed thoroughly and many contributors have extensive knowledge in many areas.
The biggest roadblock is the barrier language, on both sides (sigh). I wish i could do more to flatten that barrier.
I would encourage people from here to enlist at the FTL forum even if you don't speak french we have members posting in english and no issue whatsoever - the following discussion will stick with english.

forum registration step 1 (terms rules the usual business) and 2

www.1940lafrancecontinue.org/forum/profile.php?mode=register

1940lafrancecontinue.org/forum/profile.php?mode=register&agreed=true

present yourself here - in english
1940lafrancecontinue.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=14

1940lafrancecontinue.org/forum/

 

[Deleted member 1487]

wiking: my post tried to summarize what amounts to thirteen years of forum discussions by a hundred of members plus two books 800 pages thick. A third volume is well underway.
The FTL has been wargamed thoroughly and many contributors have extensive knowledge in many areas.
The biggest roadblock is the barrier language, on both sides (sigh). I wish i could do more to flatten that barrier.
I would encourage people from here to enlist at the FTL forum even if you don't speak french we have members posting in english and no issue whatsoever - the following discussion will stick with english.

forum registration step 1 (terms rules the usual business) and 2

www.1940lafrancecontinue.org/forum/profile.php?mode=register

1940lafrancecontinue.org/forum/profile.php?mode=register&agreed=true

present yourself here - in english
1940lafrancecontinue.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=14

1940lafrancecontinue.org/forum/

That's all fine, but there are several really silly points in the summary that defy reality. The French holding out in France until August? The French fought hard until the armistice and by then the Germans were days away from Marsellies, the Italians were fixing multiple French divisions at the border who would be trapped when the Germans continued to push down the Rhone valley, the ALA had been swept from the skies in early June and the French army had run out of men. The Rhone front was in collapse by the time the armistice was signed and fighting stopped on the 25th:
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bataille_de_la_vallée_du_Rhône_(1940)

See where they were at the time of the armistice:

Not evacuating with full speed means little to stopping the German advance in late June, while it means little gets out of France. Evacuating anything combat related means France falls sooner. Little gets out unless they start sooner than IOTL to leave.
Plus the Italians and Germans were bombing the French ports on the Mediterranean:
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardement_de_Marseille_(1940)
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardement_de_Toulon

Meanwhile the French fleet based on Toulon was occupied trying to bombard Italy rather than assisting and evacuation:
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opération_Vado

Corsica as another example; it lacked an airport or air base IOTL and the only civilian air service to the island was a seaplane ferry to Marseilles started in 1935. Vichy apparently had an inactive air unit officially based in the one grass field landing strip they had on the island, which is today the main airport on the island. They were not and won't be any sort of transit point for air units out of France, same with naval units. It was didn't have a naval base either:
https://www.quora.com/Why-didnt-the...ut-a-naval-base-there-in-preparation-for-WWII

Once France falls taking Corsica is extremely easy and wouldn't require any sort of major paratrooper operation in 1941. The Italians could take it in 1940 by themselves, especially given the proximity of Italian and Sardinian bases that would impede any sort of French support for the island once the mainland falls.

The Franco/Spanish stuff is just entirely contrary to Spanish scholarship on Franco and his desire to enter the war provided the material prerequisites were available.

Also how are the French going to invade Libya in 1940 given their messed up situation? The Italians had 8-9 divisions on the Tunisian border and the Brits were in no position to help until late in 1940.

Why does the Greece invasion still happen given the very active situation in North Africa and the Mediterranean, no prospect for an armistice on the horizon, and the jewel of grabbing the French colonies in North Africa very up for grabs? Why does Barbarossa happen in 1942 given that Hitler thought it was 1941 or never due to Soviet rearmament efforts? Especially with the Mediterranean very active and France still a significant threat?

In Asia the Japanese don't invade Indochina, but US-Japanese relations are like OTL...and then they try to invade anyway, just later?

I don't know who participated in this TL and what special knowledge they have, but clearly they aren't very knowledgeable about a great many things, including French capacity for resistance as of mid-June 1940.

 

[mottajack]

Bollocks. Well, you are entitled to your opinion, so what's the point in discussing ? I should have guessed before, 17 pages of thread...

change your scornful tone and we may discuss the matter further... you have clearly no idea of the amount of work that went behind the project. Or maybe you don't give a fuck.

By the way, one of the author of the FTL has just registered here. You will see that we aren't amateurish, by any way, as some seems to think.

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

POD aside, basically a lot of wishful thinking and some occasional realism thrown in to make it not pure ASB.

Have to agree. Have skimmed that item & theres some stretching. Tho some of the short term items are reasonable extrapolations of existing trends in the Battle of France. But, when historical figures become prominent in radically different timelines one has to wonder if thing are really thought through.

 

[Dave Howery]

hmm. I had always thought that a 'France fights on' scenario would involve mainly those forces in NA that were already there... that the main front-line French forces would be stuck there. The fleet and some of the air force could likely escape, but manpower would mainly limited to what's already there... some 10-15 rifle divisions that could be formed, with a handful of older vehicles.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

Bollocks. Well, you are entitled to your opinion, so what's the point in discussing ? I should have guessed before, 17 pages of thread...

change your scornful tone and we may discuss the matter further... you have clearly no idea of the amount of work that went behind the project. Or maybe you don't give a fuck.

By the way, one of the author of the FTL has just registered here. You will see that we aren't amateurish, by any way, as some seems to think.

I'm not seeing much in the way of counter argument other than an appeal to authority. The author that registered here is more than welcome to discuss things with me if he feels the need. I'm not trying to put down the amount of work that went into things, there are a great many what if threads that make for interesting stories even if not realistic. If you enjoy the work, then great, but if you want to argue it is realistic then we are going to have to disagree and I don't mind arguing my point if pressed. There is no scorn on my end, just pointing out the realism issues with the TL as you've laid it out.