WI: France really fights on from 1940?

[I want to learn]

I think a consequence of France fighting on is an increased focus by Hitler to knock Britain out of the war. A Mediterranean strategy, a 1941 Sealion and similarly threatening plans were seriously considered by Nazi high command but deferred when the decision for Operation Barbarossa was made. France fighting on might tip things in the other direction. As other posters have pointed out, once the Axis decided to invade French North Africa, the colonial French forces there could do little to stop them IOTL. I also think that if German diplomatic efforts had been focused on recruiting Spain into the Axis for a campaign against the west, rather than recruiting Finland, Romania, etc for a campaign against the east, they would have been successful. And if there’s one thing late 1940/ early 1941 Britain doesn’t need, it’s an Axis Spain. This is the kind of timeline that easily goes down the path where the Mediterranean is an Axis lake, Americans invade France in 1943 because their French allies are egging them on and the British can’t offer an alternative, but get whooped and don’t try again until 1945 when the leisurely reformed Red army is already kicking down the gates to Berlin. Perhaps better for overall devastation caused by war, maybe generally better for the course of human history, but not exactly a “Franco-British Union becomes world’s premiere superpower” wank

 

[MattII]

The Axis invading North Africa runs into the same issue of them invading Britain, a lack of any vessels to land troops with.

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

...
I expect the Japanese to still go south - probably to NEI first to secure the oil with a "Pearl Harbour" on Singapore to take out the combined Far East Fleet. As the campain unfolds the Philippines are at some point cut off and US enters war. ...

Why would Japan do any of that. Without occupation of French Indochina there are no embargos vs Japan, no freezing of Japans banks accounts in the US & London. So its business as usual in the Pacific and Asia. At some point the US financing of Japan tapers off, but that was occurring gradually & was not a abrupt shock as the embargos were. Odds are the US will continue financing Japans economy into 1942. By the time the Japanese leaders realize their war in chains is lost and their economy is collapsing any possibility of a successful war with US, Britain, France, and the Dutch East Indies is long past.

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

The Axis invading North Africa runs into the same issue of them invading Britain, a lack of any vessels to land troops with.

There is the port of Tripoli, and any others they capture. Still the Italian cargo fleet had its limits, and it is questionable the Italian Navy could hold open the sea lanes long enough for a land campaign to be won. If the Germans commit to a massive air campaign against Britain the Italian air force can't win against the combined Allied force backed by US replacement aircraft. If the German AF is committed to the Mediterranean then its contending with logistics problems and distances that were not factors against Britain.

 

[MattII]

There is the port of Tripoli, and any others they capture.

Expect the port at Tripoli to be set for destruction as soon as the British capture it. Also Tripoli had ~2/3 the cargo capacity of all of Libya, so losing that will be a death-blow to Italy. Also, with no attack on Mers-el-Kébir or Dakar, the French have enough firepower to be a viable deterrent to any landing.

 

[thaddeus]

Why would Japan do any of that. Without occupation of French Indochina there are no embargos vs Japan, no freezing of Japans banks accounts in the US & London. So its business as usual in the Pacific and Asia. At some point the US financing of Japan tapers off, but that was occurring gradually & was not a abrupt shock as the embargos were. Odds are the US will continue financing Japans economy into 1942. By the time the Japanese leaders realize their war in chains is lost and their economy is collapsing any possibility of a successful war with US, Britain, France, and the Dutch East Indies is long past.

wonder under this scenario if Axis USSR is not more logical than Axis Japan? know the arguments against (Hitler made most of them in writing himself) but we are talking about crazy people here ...

even beyond the resources of USSR, resumed trading with China may seem more critical? which would almost necessitate transit thru USSR? (during wartime)

leaving aside the Allies carrying out some attack on the Soviet oilfields, which seem more probable with French holding Syria and Soviets supplying Italy with oil?

 

[merlin]

If FFO then the Germans will be too busy trying to deal with the French to have any meaningful BoB in 1940. There may be some attacks but from just one Lw air Fleet not two.
With the distance to cover, and fighting French drawing the Germans may not secure the French Med. coast before late August. Air Fleet three will be busy taking over airbases to raid Corsica - which at some point the French will realise it's untenable.
While the French Air Force won't be any where near the standard of the Anglo-American ones in North-western Africa in '42/43 - they should be able make a big dent in any Axis attempts of reinforcing Libya by air, with the combined British & French Navies strangling it from sea-borne reinforcement.

Ironically US aircraft already ordered by France will be available to France, rather than the RAF as per OTL - P-39, P-40, Bostons, Marylands and many more.

OTL Wavell routed the Italians in Libya, but couldn't carry on west, this time the French will attack east.

Will Taranto still happen - more likely that more carriers are involved and/or RAF bombers from Malta, which would've been built up earlier.

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

wonder under this scenario if Axis USSR is not more logical than Axis Japan? know the arguments against (Hitler made most of them in writing himself) but we are talking about crazy people here ...

Given the war with China had gone pear shaped by 1939 only peace negotiations make sense for Japan after that. The execution of the 'Strike South' strategy was forced when the Embargos put the Jpanese leaders in a impossible situation. From their PoV concessions anywhere were not a option. Until Japan occupied French Indo China & woke up US leaders, it was scraping by with US bank credit. Since they would not contemplate anything but complete victory in China the least crazy thing to do is try to wrap that up & consolidate.

...even beyond the resources of USSR, resumed trading with China may seem more critical? which would almost necessitate transit thru USSR? (during wartime)

Were there any resources in China that could be sent in sufficient quantity?

leaving aside the Allies carrying out some attack on the Soviet oilfields, which seem more probable with French holding Syria and Soviets supplying Italy with oil?

The attack on the Soviet oilfields was a Finnish War thing & was dropped when the Finns capitulated.

The Italians had their petrol from Rumania. They'ed invested in the Rumanian oil industry in previous decades and were influential, until Germany gained greater influence as 1940 played out. The USSR exported some oil products, but could use up the production it self.

 

[jmc247]

If FFO then the Germans will be too busy trying to deal with the French to have any meaningful BoB in 1940. There may be some attacks but from just one Lw air Fleet not two.

That is likely. It’s also quite possible Italy is deterred from intervening in Greece if North Africa is gone and they believe an Anglo-French force can land in short order to back up the Greeks.

All of this leaves three realistic options for Germany in ‘41. Build up militarily while doing little. Make a deal with Stalin to invade the Middle East. Invade the Soviet Union.

 

[Curtain Jerker]

I think a consequence of France fighting on is an increased focus by Hitler to knock Britain out of the war. A Mediterranean strategy, a 1941 Sealion and similarly threatening plans were seriously considered by Nazi high command but deferred when the decision for Operation Barbarossa was made. France fighting on might tip things in the other direction. As other posters have pointed out, once the Axis decided to invade French North Africa, the colonial French forces there could do little to stop them IOTL. I also think that if German diplomatic efforts had been focused on recruiting Spain into the Axis for a campaign against the west, rather than recruiting Finland, Romania, etc for a campaign against the east, they would have been successful. And if there’s one thing late 1940/ early 1941 Britain doesn’t need, it’s an Axis Spain. This is the kind of timeline that easily goes down the path where the Mediterranean is an Axis lake, Americans invade France in 1943 because their French allies are egging them on and the British can’t offer an alternative, but get whooped and don’t try again until 1945 when the leisurely reformed Red army is already kicking down the gates to Berlin. Perhaps better for overall devastation caused by war, maybe generally better for the course of human history, but not exactly a “Franco-British Union becomes world’s premiere superpower” wank

Franco wasn't dumb. He realized that the only thing feeding his country was imported grain that could have been easily cut off by a British blockade. There's no way Hitler and Co could trade/sell/give enough food to offset that loss. There's food riots in Madrid a year after Franco joins the Axis and that's all she wrote.

Hypothetically he gains almost nothing joining the Axis and potentially loses everything in short order.

 

[sarahz]

I think a consequence of France fighting on is an increased focus by Hitler to knock Britain out of the war. A Mediterranean strategy, a 1941 Sealion and similarly threatening plans were seriously considered by Nazi high command but deferred when the decision for Operation Barbarossa was made. France fighting on might tip things in the other direction. As other posters have pointed out, once the Axis decided to invade French North Africa, the colonial French forces there could do little to stop them IOTL. I also think that if German diplomatic efforts had been focused on recruiting Spain into the Axis for a campaign against the west, rather than recruiting Finland, Romania, etc for a campaign against the east, they would have been successful. And if there’s one thing late 1940/ early 1941 Britain doesn’t need, it’s an Axis Spain. This is the kind of timeline that easily goes down the path where the Mediterranean is an Axis lake, Americans invade France in 1943 because their French allies are egging them on and the British can’t offer an alternative, but get whooped and don’t try again until 1945 when the leisurely reformed Red army is already kicking down the gates to Berlin. Perhaps better for overall devastation caused by war, maybe generally better for the course of human history, but not exactly a “Franco-British Union becomes world’s premiere superpower” wank

Axis Spain not going to happen unless Britain is almost down for the count. As for the Med being an Axis lake, how on earth does adding a strong French fleet achieve that when it could not be done OTL. No substantial German force could even get into the Channel let alone the Med, even assuming such a force existed which it did not. It would have to be built, which would be difficult given German and Italian ship building capacity. and trying to do so would reduce the U-boat and army/airforce construction. Even if the warships could be built what would be used to ferry soldiers across the Med or even more seriously carry out the blessed Sea lion against strong defences..

 

[arctic warrior]

Why would Japan do any of that. Without occupation of French Indochina there are no embargos vs Japan, no freezing of Japans banks accounts in the US & London. So its business as usual in the Pacific and Asia. At some point the US financing of Japan tapers off, but that was occurring gradually & was not a abrupt shock as the embargos were. Odds are the US will continue financing Japans economy into 1942. By the time the Japanese leaders realize their war in chains is lost and their economy is collapsing any possibility of a successful war with US, Britain, France, and the Dutch East Indies is long past.

Ok - and an even better situation for the Allies.

 

[arctic warrior]

That is likely. It’s also quite possible Italy is deterred from intervening in Greece if North Africa is gone and they believe an Anglo-French force can land in short order to back up the Greeks.

All of this leaves three realistic options for Germany in ‘41. Build up militarily while doing little. Make a deal with Stalin to invade the Middle East. Invade the Soviet Union.

Italy/Mussolini may still go for Greece with France needing time to rebuild and build up its forces in Tunesia. So effectively things may unfold not too unlike OTL with Graziani invading Egypt and getting his butt kicked by WDF augmented by French/Polish troops from Syria only to speed up the destruction of the Italian Cyrenaika Army.

Vichy had limited production resources to keep its military running but did manage to get in an shooting war with the British/Commonwealth. France fighting on will have quite a number of aircraft evacuated to NA as they did OTL to keep going cannibalizing to keep machines in the air all the time receiving new aircraft from the US as per contracts. They have the gold hoard in Dakar!

Hitler have to decide to let the French in NA wither and attack Britain or give Musso unwanted help in NA to take out the French. Though that may only be around late September early October 1940 depending how long the French will be able to stem the German drive on Med coast in the first place.

The German airlanding capacity is spent even worse than OTL with the 7. Fallschirmjäger Division taking part in the fighting in France as infantry.

 

[jmc247]

North Africa will be done much before Germany even has time to seriously plan involvement. A two front war in NA will be lost very quick for Italy.

That also frees up French and British forces for landing in Greece quickly if Italy invades which I don’t think they will between the French Navy with the British Navy dominating the Mediterranean and able to move troops like nothing.

Bennie was stupid, but not that stupid.

 

[walmart]

Without the German and Italian troops used in North Africa, Would operation Barbarossa go better.

 

[Catspoke]

German troops will appear along the Pyrenees mid July or so, could the German offer a huge carrot / stick approach with Spain unavailable in our time line, to try and force Spanish entry.

1) Offer a slice of Southern France, Morocco, part of Algeria, and a share of the loot of France.
2) The German army and Luftwaffe lined up all along the whole length of the Pyrenees as a threat.

--------------------------------

I don't think an Allied conquest of Africa would be an immediate thing, The Italians would remain on the defense everywhere, wouldn't invade Egypt in September 40, their paper strength is large, The British don't have really anything in place until December 40 and the French would take a while to sort themselves out and arrange source of supply until about December 1940 themselves.

The Italians don't invade Greece, because they have gorged themselves on occupation zones in Southern France and Corsica and are involved in active operations with France until mid July, late July for Corsica, its a bit much for a limited economy country like Italy to try Greece too in October 1940.

-------------------------------------

Japan probably won't be able to occupy IndoChina, perhaps butterflying away the events of the Pacific.

---------------------------------------------

The German occupation of France could be Poland like brutal, Hitler would be pissed the French didn't make peace and there is no collaborationist regime to mediate things.

If this butterflies away the German invasion of the Soviet Union, and the USA-Japan war you could have a German occupation of France for 10 years. Maybe Vichy collaboration wasn't such a bad idea???

 

[Lawnchair Captain]

With France still fighting on Hitler could offer Franco what Franco wanted and Hitler could not give him in OTL because that would mean antagonising Vichy France and forcing the French governors and military commanders in North Africa join the British and keep fighting. Now with the French still in the war this would be out of the window so there would be no problem for Hitler to accept Franco's ambitions in North Africa and south France. So yes, considering that in OTL Franco he almost joined the war when France was collapsing Franco would be very happy to take this chance to make his "Africanista"'s wet dreams com true.

Problem would have been that even in its sorry state the French army would have more likely been able to defeat the Spanish forces in Morocco before the Germans were able to send meaningful help. We need to consider that if France kept fighting the German forces that would arrive to the Pyrenees would be at the end of a long logistical chain and would do it after constant rearguard actions against the retreating French forces. Bridges would have been destroyed and railroads made not useable for a period of time. And good luck trying to supply them from Spain after the Civil War. It would take some time for things to be sorted out and time would be a luxury that the Spanish army in North Africa would not have (alongside food and ammunitions). By the time the first German soldiers arrived to Algeciras the French flag would be flying over Ceuta and Melilla.

This leaves Franco the chance of taking Gibraltar with German help and after a bloody siege while the British blockade the shipments of grain to Spain and contact any monarchist general in Spain who might not be happy with the ascendancy of the Falange. Oh, and the British high command would be salivating as they look at the Canary Islands.

Could the Germans land in North Africa from Spain? It's a possibility but it would be a contested landing and it might be bloody and success is not assured.

 

[stubear1012]

One of the things that may change is the economic impact of the war on Britain finance. My understanding is that the USA made Britain sell a lot of their dollar assets to pay for war materials. Also, Britain provide the USA with a lot of their advance technology for free or at a low cost due to Britain being alone against Germany. Britain ended the war with little dollar assets and debt that was only paid off a few years ago.

Assuming that the French and Polish gold is available, then Britain may not have to sell off their dollar assets and may get a better licensing agreement with the US. With better agreements, there would be a revenue stream of dollars after the war. Also if a large number of French scientists and engineers flee France, they could end up working with British technology companies. In the long run great collaboration between Britain and France on technical research would benefit both countries. You might even see more joint ventures of British and French companies after the war so that they have the size to compete with the large American companies.

 

[DrakonFin]

The attack on the Soviet oilfields was a Finnish War thing & was dropped when the Finns capitulated.

Mind your terms. The Winter War ended not in a capitulation (ie. surrender) but in a negotiated peace (however small Finland's leeway in those negotiations was). An actual capitulation to the Soviet Union would have meant an occupation and loss of independence. The Moscow Peace of 1940 avoided both and allowed Finland to keep its constitutional political and legal system and an intact military and law enforcement apparatus.

 

[Imladrik]

IMO most of the discussion in this thread is far too sanguine about Allied chances in this situation.

Imo you are ignorant about the french army.

At this time there were no Allied armies to speak of. The British army was largely destroyed in France; most of the men were evacuated at Dunkirk, but nearly all equipment was lost. The French army was in also destroyed. Even supposing a substantial number of troops could be evacuated to Algeria, they would have little or no equipment, and no source of new equipment. Or of ammunition, or fuel, or food. Britain was flat on its back, and had nothing to spare. The US was not providing any aid at this time - and was short of equipment for its own Army expansion.

The French army in North Africa was large and equiped. They had tanks, artillery and aircrafts, each in larager number than the italian had.

The RAF was in reasonable shape; it could - barely - prevent the Luftwaffe from controlling the air over Britain, but not stop the Blitz. The Armée de l'Aire was effectively destroyed. Even if a few aircraft could have been moved to Algeria, there would be no fuel or spare parts.

Most of the French air Force that would have been evacuated to North Africa would have been american aircrafts, with spare parts bought in the US aplenty.

Only in naval power were the Allies stronger than the Axis. The French Navy would be a substantial addition, but it would be a wasting asset, as French North Africa could not support it properly. (Nor could Britain supply ammunition or spare parts.)

Plenty of american corporations could supply ammunitions or spare parts, as ammunition is easy to produce, even for exotic calibers, and spare parts for the navy are rarely built assembly line styles and thus theri would be no difference if they were built in the US or in France.

In any case, the Allies would be unable to prevent large-scale Axis deployment to North Africa. In late 1942, Britain and the US were unable to prevent the Axis from deploying an entire Panzer Army to Tunisia, and that was after Italy's merchant shipping was depleted by two years of war, and while Germany was heavily engaged on the Eastern Front.

In OTL the axis controled both sides of the Med. In TTL, the axis would be lucky to still have one small port in 1941.

In 1940... The combined Allied navies can partially blockade Libya for a while, but at substantial and increasing cost as the Axis air forces develop effective anti-shipping techniques. Also it will be partial, as noted, so there will be at least enough Axis troops in Libya to defeat any Allied attacks.

In 1940 there was no anti tank weapon in Lybia that could pierce an R35, or D1 or H35. Those tanks were more numerous in North Africa than the infamously useless italian tanks. The only large port in Lybia is Tripoli, which is less than 200km from the tunisian border. Tripoli would fall in weeks once the French North African decided to take it

By fall 1940, the blockading will become insupportable, and the way will be clear for large Axis deployments, and the start of a powerful Axis drive into French North Africa. I don't see how the French can stop such a drive. Britain can do a bit to help, but not enough IMO.

With what navy ? with what air force operating from where ? OTL, the axis could barely support the small africa corps. No way it could invade French North Africa.

The British did manage OTL to deploy enough force to Egypt and East Africa for campaigns there. They still have to do East Africa or lose the Middle East, but they will go on the defensive in Egypt and support the French in North Africa. Even so, it is very hard to see how French colonial garrisons and a small British BEF can hold off, say, a third of the entire Wehrmacht.

A third of the wehrmacht ? Are you stupid ? IN OTL THE GERMAN AND THE ITALIANS COULD SUPPORT LESS THAN 20 DIVISIONS IN THE WHOLE AFRICAN THEATER.
You are predicting worse results for the allies while they are in a better posture than OTL and the axis in a worse one.

Also colonial garrison ? The bulk of the French Foreign Legions, Algerian tirailleurs and Morrocan Goumiers where in North Africa. Each of those have stellar records against the vaunted German übermenchen.

I will say that the extra French ships, and the use of French bases in Morocco and West Africa, will be a significant benefit in the Battle of the Atlantic.

There will be diplomatic consequences. As the Axis advances in Morocco, Spanish Morocco comes into the line of fire. If the Axis takes Morocco, Rio de Oro is between Morocco and West Africa, which the Axis cannot reach.

Even if Franco was a monster, he wasn't stupid. No way he would help Hitler. And they wouldn't take Morocco militarily.