• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

Let's discuss France Fights On a.k.a. the Fantasque Time Line

The army desperately needs more men, which means recruiting among the native population, which means providing incentives in terms of civil rights. It's a short-term calculation but with long-term consequences. Besides, OTL has amply demonstrated that De Gaulle had no qualms about throwing the Pieds-Noirs under the bus when they didn't get on with the program.

Metropolitan France is under German occupation, with an illegitimate puppet government of opportunists and extremists who (even more so than OTL) are constantly at loggerheads with each other. Nobody there gives a damn about what's going on in the colonies; there are more urgent matters do deal with such as finding enough food to survive.


Perhaps I'm just not explaining it very well.

North African units already played a substantial part in the WWII IOTL without substantial promises of reform. Afterall, Algiers was the capital of Free France from 1943, and the authority ignored the demands from the Muslim Algerians in form of "Algerian People's Manifesto". Calls for moderate reform, including the abolishment of Code de l'Indigénat did not materialize, and Crémieux Decree was barely reinstated. The calls for independence immediately after the war was met with massacres in Setif and Guelma. You have to admit, it all does sound rather wish-fulfillment-y compared to the OTL.

Furthermore, we are talking about De Gaulle in 1941, not 1958. He argued that the "Mission Civilisatrice" precluded any thought of autonomy or any possibility of development outside the French empire, and that "Self-government must be rejected - even in the more distant future". at the end of the Brazzaville Conference in 1944. De Gaulle's response to Paul Mus, on his counsel against intervention in Indochina is telling: "Dear Professor, we will win because we are the strongest".

I'm talking about this because I find the concept fascinating and worth going deeper into it, but it does seem like the timeline is heavy on the wish fulfillment and less on deep consideration what the Third Republic was. In that vein, I'd argue that the most plausible POD for the "France Fight on" would probably be successful SFIO-led Popular Front with a massive political capital that confronts the Third Reich during the Sudeten Crisis with Soviet support.
 
Quick question, in that POD how does the USSR reach Czechoslovakia via attacking through Poland?
 
Quick question, in that POD how does the USSR reach Czechoslovakia via attacking through Poland?
It would require either Poland or Romania to allow transit of the Soviet troops. Poland is an absolute no-go, but if I remember correctly, Romania did offer Soviet transit through Northern Romania. France had far more diplomatic clout with Romania than Poland, and in an active we-are-intervening France, I think an argument could be made of Soviet participation through Romania.
 
It would require either Poland or Romania to allow transit of the Soviet troops. Poland is an absolute no-go, but if I remember correctly, Romania did offer Soviet transit through Northern Romania. France had far more diplomatic clout with Romania than Poland, and in an active we-are-intervening France, I think an argument could be made of Soviet participation through Romania.

I did some research into this as part of my dissertation and found that, at least from the British perspective, the Romanians were apprehensive about the concept of Soviet troops moving through their territory but not entirely opposed to it if they could be given certain assurances about the Anglo-French upholding their sovereignty in case the Red Army decided it wasn't going to leave.
 
They do, but the local French defenders are severely outmatched. Afterwards the war moves to a guerilla phase, which puts the Viet Minh in de facto control of the situation on the ground.

Wouldn't that put them at war with Britain and France in 1940? Or do they invade in 1941? Neither option is particularly good for the Japanese.
 
Wouldn't that put them at war with Britain and France in 1940? Or do they invade in 1941? Neither option is particularly good for the Japanese.
They invade in December 1941 as in OTL.

Since Indochina remains under the control of the Free French rather than the collaborationist government (which is in Paris rather than Vichy), the relations with Japan degrade sooner than in OTL, but the Japanese still invade along with all other European colonies.

IIRC the non-canon Australian version of the TL has some of the colonies break with the legal government and go with the collaborationist one, which makes absolutely no sense, since for one thing the Métropole is completely cut off from its overseas possessions, and for another the pro-German regime is not recognized as legitimate by anyone. I think the point was to make the Commonwealth look better by comparison.
 
They invade in December 1941 as in OTL.

Since Indochina remains under the control of the Free French rather than the collaborationist government (which is in Paris rather than Vichy), the relations with Japan degrade sooner than in OTL, but the Japanese still invade along with all other European colonies.

IIRC the non-canon Australian version of the TL has some of the colonies break with the legal government and go with the collaborationist one, which makes absolutely no sense, since for one thing the Métropole is completely cut off from its overseas possessions, and for another the pro-German regime is not recognized as legitimate by anyone. I think the point was to make the Commonwealth look better by comparison.

Having the Japanese invade Indochina in December 1941 rather than occupy it in September 1940 makes it hard to see them acheiving the same level of success that they had in the initial months of their SE Asian campaign. Even if they can overwhelm the French garrison relatively quickly it's still a huge waste of resources and time not to mention the number of troops swallowed up in the operation. If the writers wanted the Pacific war to start out as close as possible to OTL then it maybe would have been better for Indochina to align itself with the Nazi installed puppet so the Japanese can walk in at their leisure as per OTL.
 
Last edited:
Having the Japanese invade Indochina in December 1941 rather than occupy it in September 1940 makes it hard to see them achieving the same level of success that they had in the initial months of their SE Asian campaign. Even if they can overwhelm the French garrison relatively quickly it's still a huge waste of resources and time not to mention the number of troops swallowed up in the operation. If the writers wanted the Pacific war to start out as close as possible to OTL then it maybe would have been better for Indochina to align itself with the Nazi installed puppet so the Japanese can walk in at their leisure as per OTL.
But they didn't want that, and as I said it wouldn't make sense for any French colony to do that. There's still the existing legal government to take orders from, same as the Belgian and Dutch colonies. Of course that does make it harder for the Japanese, too bad for them. Singapore manages to repeal a first attack and falls after a four-month siege, and China gets another year's worth of supplies transiting on the Hanoi-Kunming railroad.
 
But they didn't want that, and as I said it wouldn't make sense for any French colony to do that. There's still the existing legal government to take orders from, same as the Belgian and Dutch colonies.

I agree but that's why it's a bit of a shame they went for such a similar premise in the first place. There are a lot of potential opportunities that could arise from such a large butterfly and it would have been interesting to see it explored in a bit more depth.

Of course that does make it harder for the Japanese, too bad for them. Singapore manages to repeal a first attack and falls after a four-month siege, and China gets another year's worth of supplies transiting on the Hanoi-Kunming railroad.

It would be difficult to see them taking Singapore at all, although they didn't really have four months to waste either.
 
I agree but that's why it's a bit of a shame they went for such a similar premise in the first place. There are a lot of potential opportunities that could arise from such a large butterfly and it would have been interesting to see it explored in a bit more depth.



It would be difficult to see them taking Singapore at all, although they didn't really have four months to waste either.

Wasn't the strike south plan ran on a shoe string logistics train?
 
How many pieds-noirs compared to native Algerians ? they were a minority. What the French government needs, urgently, is ten thousands of men in the army. Only native algerians have such numbers, yet the trick to enlist them is to give them more rights as citizens in the post-war world. Short-term / long ter- tradeoff, and a risky one, but the French government has no other choice.
didn't Great Britain enlisted Indian citizens in WWI and WWII the same way ? (perdon my ignorance on the subject, just asking).
 
Having the Japanese invade Indochina in December 1941 rather than occupy it in September 1940 makes it hard to see them acheiving the same level of success that they had in the initial months of their SE Asian campaign.

a good point and surely enough, the Japanese end screwed and stalled a little earlier than OTL. For example, OTL string of aeronaval battles Coral-Sea-Midway-Guadalcanal is changed - Coral Sea doesn't even exists.

FFO authors assumed that Fench forces in FIC were too little to resist the Japanese juggernaut, and the change to the Pacific War, while real, are minimal when compared to OTL.
OTL Vichy France or Free French or FTL Algier France, the bottom line is that FIC is so far away, so big, and si vulnerable, and the post 1940 debacle French Army is so weak, with so little resources left, very little can be send to FIC to fight the japanese. E
Hell, had FFO been a French wank, the entire Pacific war would have been shortened and won far more rapidly, thanks to the French. Instead their influence on the theater as a whole, is not that big when compared to OTL. FIC is merely a blip on the radar.
 
My problem with FFO is that it pretends that there is a way out of that collapse that not only works in regards to creating a force that fights on but for it to somehow maintain the mass support and loyalty of the body politic in general. It creates a political will that just didn't exist. To the extent that its Point of Divergence is nearly a farce "Oh the Premier would have done the morally correct and painful thing and walked the path of a martyr if only his girlfriend was dead?" That's not how nations on the brink go about continuing to stand and fight.

It doesn't work that way. At all.

Let's take that problem differently.

As of early June 1940 (when the FFO POD happens) , a lot of French still wanted to fight - see the resistance on the Weygand line, Les cadets de saumur, and many others.
Fighting from Algiers was seriously considered.

What happened over the next month was that

- a) Pétain and Laval did one hell of a good job (unfortunately) to get 3rd Republic legacy. They granted themselves full power (July 10, 1940) then compliance from all three armies, and many other symbols left by the Republic.

- b) This, plus Mers el Kebir, made a lot of people HESITATE to join De Gaulle in London, because he was a nobody with little forces, little political clout, and little legitimacy on the world stage, unfortunately.
Mers el Kebir happened on July 3, 1940, and unfortunately, it was one hell of godsend for Pétain and Laval. They didn't had to move a finger: for most French people, the British were now traitors, and this added to Dunkirk in people minds (Betrayed. Twice in two months. That what most people felt back then. Completely unfair to the British, of course.)

- c) Most importantly, most people assumed Pétain would get france OUT of WWII, and that the Germans would RETIRE

- d) as happened in 1870 - they occupied Paris, humiliated France, but by 1871 they went away.

- e) Few people imagined Pétain would sold the country to cooperation with Germany. Pétain actually was not that enthusiast about it (he had fought in Verdun after all)

- f) it was mostly Laval that started licking Hitler arse, with the vain hope Hitler would be nice with France and its inhabitants (how wrong was he: Hitler didn't gave a shit about Laval or France, he was interested only in 1) killing all the jews and 2) killing all the communists)

- g) The exact reason why FFO POD went the way it did was not only to get ride of Paul Reynaud mistress, but also of another, far more important advisor that was a defeatist and hated de Gaulle. His name was Paul de Villelume.
In the FFO POD, Villelume is driving the car carrying Reynaud mistress and then he stupidly crash to Reynaud furor. Convenient (as Batman HISHE would say) ? maybe.

- h) So Reynaud gets a shot in the arm and turns away from defeatism, NOT because his girlfriend is dead, but also because one of his key advisors (defeatist) is gone. That's the real turning point.

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_de_Villelume

- i) Pétain prestige and growing influence, that OTL ensured a lot of French people would stuck with Vichy as a lesser evil, despite the growing horror it carried - that prestige and influence are stopped dead on tracks on June 13.

- j) Instead of Reynaud throwing the towel and Pétain stepping in (as happened OTL on june 17) Reynaud does not throw the towel, the defeatist faction is stopped some days earlier. Pétain tries a political coup de force on June 13 but is defeated by a coalition - not only the sacro*sanct De Gaulle, but also many less known politicians, blum, Mandel, and many others.
 
Last edited:
North African units already played a substantial part in the WWII IOTL without substantial promises of reform.

SPOT ON. Mind you, it worked the other way around: they hoped that their sacrifice (Monte Cassino...) would help granting their children more rights as Algerian citizens after the end of the war. I said - more rights as citizens of French Algeria, not full blown independance, although of course many of them probably hoped for it, as a second step, in the future... and if possibly, peacefully - as happened to Marrocco and Tunisia between 1955 and 1963, by the way. No war there.

And guess what they got instead, on the very May 8, 1945 ?

this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sétif_and_Guelma_massacre

5 000 dead. It was the major turning point that led to the 1954 war. Having fought in Monte Cassino, and being "rewarded" that way - you guess, they were quite pissed-off.

FFO reasoned that having, not only the Government, but also the army and most importantly, industry and agriculture, moved to Algiers for some years, would help solving some major issues that led straight to the 1945 and 1954 crisis, and the following war. For example, for all the Lend Lease canned food coming from America, Algerian agriculture also has to de developped to feed all this hungry mouths in exile from the Metropole. At some point in the future, the improved agriculture in Algeria can only improve things. Same for the industry, whatever can be salvaged from the Metropole, can't do any bad to future Algeria.

More generally, even if not an indepandant country, having Algiers welcoming France in exile, makes France willing to give something as reward for the hospitality.
In a more cynical way, the pieds-noir are told "keep the racism low, otherwise the "indigenes" will throw us back into the Mediterranean sea"
 
Last edited:
Having the Japanese invade Indochina in December 1941 rather than occupy it in September 1940 makes it hard to see them acheiving the same level of success that they had in the initial months of their SE Asian campaign. Even if they can overwhelm the French garrison relatively quickly it's still a huge waste of resources and time not to mention the number of troops swallowed up in the operation. If the writers wanted the Pacific war to start out as close as possible to OTL then it maybe would have been better for Indochina to align itself with the Nazi installed puppet so the Japanese can walk in at their leisure as per OTL.

That was my big stumbling point. They have the same incentive as OTL to conquer Indochina (prevent it being used as a staging area for Chinese resistance), but a lot of reason to not stir up Commonwealth or U.S. opposition. A very minimal British or American (more likely British) commitment to Indochina means no Japanese invasion, therefore no American oil embargo, therefore no reason to attack Southeast Asia. There's a lot of ways to do this, but all of them mean a very different Pacific War.

In this timeline the Pacific War goes almost exactly like OTL because reasons, but of course with more glorious French heroism along the way. It's my objection to the whole thing in microcosm. And that's sad, because in attempting to make a story about France contributing more proudly to the war instead of the national shame of OTL, they instead make French participation irrelevant by making things too much like OTL.
 
Burton: see my post here (52)

http://forum.sealionpress.co.uk/ind...the-fantasque-time-line.450/page-3#post-51046

Weren't America and Japan on a collision course, whatever happened ? because of the war in China, among other tensions ?

See here a translation of a FFO page where one of the three "founding fathers" (Loic Mahe) ponders about the OTL oil embargo of July 1941

https://translate.google.com/transl...beb396a5847438e78&&hl=fr&ie=UTF-8&sl=fr&tl=en

Another, older page
https://translate.google.com/transl...topic.php?p=10631&&hl=fr&ie=UTF-8&sl=fr&tl=en

The (FFO) consensus was that the Pacific war was mostly unavoidable because the oil embargo was only one among many other factors
- Tojo and his clique being in denial of reality (victory disease since 1905)
- Japan oil reserves from 1940 onwards, before the embargo - two years, then burst
- China
- U.S strengthening of the Philippines, to accelerate in 1942 and beyond
 
Last edited:
Burton: see my post here (52)

http://forum.sealionpress.co.uk/ind...the-fantasque-time-line.450/page-3#post-51046

Weren't America and Japan on a collision course, whatever happened ? because of the war in China, among other tensions ?

See here a translation of a FFO page where one of the three "founding fathers" (Loic Mahe) ponders about the OTL oil embargo of July 1941

https://translate.google.com/transl...beb396a5847438e78&&hl=fr&ie=UTF-8&sl=fr&tl=en

Another, older page
https://translate.google.com/transl...topic.php?p=10631&&hl=fr&ie=UTF-8&sl=fr&tl=en

The (FFO) consensus was that the Pacific war was mostly unavoidable because the oil embargo was only one among many other factors
- Tojo and his clique being in denial of reality (victory disease since 1905)
- Japan oil reserves from 1940 onwards, before the embargo - two years, then burst
- China
- U.S strengthening of the Philippines, to accelerate in 1942 and beyond

I don't disagree that U.S./Japan conflict was pretty close to inevitable, I just don't like how the timeline chose to make it as much like OTL as possible instead of presenting something unique. My thought was more that the U.S. would get involved in Europe one way or another by 1942 and that the Japanese might use that opportunity to strike.
 
It doesn't work that way. At all.

Let's take that problem differently.

Since you're going to have a fit again if I question the logic of you saying most wanted to keep fighting I'll pass that.

My problem with the PoD be it the Mistress or the Advisor dying is that it's a moot point. Reynaud wasn't a Churchill and he wasn't a Wilhemina. The idea that the whole sink or swim of the French government between cowardice and the hard road coming down to one person is, to be blunt, an excuse. It didn't come down to one person and it couldn't come down to one person. The support Petain was finding for himself in the government won't go away, nor will the interest in an Armistice because as you note, many were just hoping for an 1870. There were people who seemed interested in the idea of preparing for "The Next War" but there wasn't a substantial political force in place pushing for Algeria and the hard road. A few scattered elements but the fact that most of them didn't even go to the Free French until later makes puts their will to fight on without remiss in 1940 under a cloud of intense doubt.

There are plenty of Ways for France to keep going and maintain its honor in the war, but it would require a PoD probably earlier then Munich.
 
Either you are trolling, or you have not read a single word of what I wrote.

but it would require a PoD probably earlier then Munich.

WTF ? hell no. Anything can happen before May 20, 1940 - the day the Germans reached Abbeville and closed the Dunkirk pocket. It is the turning point.

Before that day, France had real chances to contain the German onslaught. Any small butterfly can do it - all the way from Munich to von Manstein not being heard to Rubarth and his platoon being blown during the Sedan crossings, or Flavigny not being a stupid old arse and not waiting 24 hours to launch a counter attack on May 12-13, or somebody listening to French reconnaissance pilots having seen the 100 miles long jam in the Belgian Ardennes, and bombing the shit out of it.

After May 20, a counterattack in Abbeville (what De Gaulle failed some days later) is the last hope. Past this point, the Metropole is lost. BUT this doesn't mean the UTTER SHAME of Vichy. Once again, anything can happen before that fateful June 17, when Reynaud threw the towel and Pétain stepped in.
Pétain was born in 1856, he could really blow an aneurysm and died, and without his IMMENSE prestige, Vichy would be revealed as it ugly self in only days or weeks. Laval and his consorts had the charisma of a dried dog shit.

And even after that day, a different Mers El Kebir would help De Gaulle, and lead to a successfull Dakar and far more support.

Nice. I see where this is coming. So the Netherlands can have a Wilhemina and GB, a Churchill, but France is doomed to get a Vichy. Dear God, this forum looks like a 2005, not 2018, AH forum.
Crap, even AH.com ain't like this anymore - there was far more respect there for the French soldiers of WWII. All 100 000 of them that got killed during these fateful six weeks.

I'm getting frustrated with this forum and discussion. Completely hopeless.
 
Last edited:
How about everyone just calms down and takes a break, maybe? Let's try and remain collegiate even over potentially controversial issues
 
Back
Top