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

[Hendryk]

I'm getting frustrated with this forum and discussion. Completely hopeless.

As someone who contributes to FFO and has a long history of interactions with Burton and other AH.commers, I'm confident that this is simply a misunderstanding. Please don't take their criticisms the wrong way.

 

[Japhy]

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.

You really don't get where this is coming from apparently if you're trying to paint me as some American nationalist who buys into "Surrender-Monkeys" or if you think I don't have respect for the French troops who died in 1940 and afterwards. I'm sorry if I'm not being clear enough about this but I'm also sorry you keep resorting to being insulting towards me, so I'm just going to step away from this discussion. I'm really sorry for the bother, and you shouldn't paint the entire site just based on the fact that I disagree with you.

 

[Earling]

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.

France got a de Gaulle.

The issue with the POD as I see it is the manufacturing and logistical base in North Africa. Lets say you could move a substantial portion of the army to Algeria - 1 million or so - this would clearly be a potent force. In OTL I think the Free French mustered 150k, rising to about 300k by 1944? Most of this was equipped with British and then American equipment. Unfortunately French resources are likely to be stretched to breaking point supplying and equipping such a force as anything other than fairly immobile light infantry. Just getting enough food, oil and medical supplies is going to be a challenge. Building large numbers of tanks, aircraft and artillery isn't obviously on the cards. The British are struggling to equip themselves.

The danger is that you just get large numbers of ill and malnourished young men, rapidly breaking apart as an army. This would be true for anyone - a Churchill might have wanted to continue the war if Britain had fallen, but it doesn't mean you could suddenly transport 1-2 million men to Canada or India and keep them in fighting condition without British factories churning out equipment.

On the other hand fighting on avoids Mers el Kebir and the British and French Navies (including France's substantial submarine force) operating together should be able to sweep the Italians from the sea (their freedom of action limited only by the Italian air force). This likely ends the North African campaign at a stroke - and places much of Italy under blockade. The threat of raids and invasions anywhere on the Mediterranean would force more garrisons, likely pulling soldiers away from Barbarossa. With less pressure, the British and French could send a more significant force to Asia.

Unfortunately at this point I think you hit something of a wall. The Anglo-French could potentially capture Sicily - but doing dramatically more than this probably depends on the Americans joining the war. Which means everyone will have to wait for them to get organised and transfer over. At some point (say 1943 at the earliest) the Americans could start supplying that million man army in Africa with everything they need - but after 3 years I am not sure what state it would be in.

 

[Burton K Wheeler]

As someone who contributes to FFO and has a long history of interactions with Burton and other AH.commers, I'm confident that this is simply a misunderstanding. Please don't take their criticisms the wrong way.

I realize that I'm coming across as excessively negative about the project, which isn't really intended. I completely get what they're trying to do, and I'm impressed by the amount of effort put into it. My complaints are mostly personal. I see a lot of interesting allohistory questions raised, which the TL mostly ignores in favor of doing things the safe way.

 

[Burton K Wheeler]

France got a de Gaulle.

The issue with the POD as I see it is the manufacturing and logistical base in North Africa. Lets say you could move a substantial portion of the army to Algeria - 1 million or so - this would clearly be a potent force. In OTL I think the Free French mustered 150k, rising to about 300k by 1944? Most of this was equipped with British and then American equipment. Unfortunately French resources are likely to be stretched to breaking point supplying and equipping such a force as anything other than fairly immobile light infantry. Just getting enough food, oil and medical supplies is going to be a challenge. Building large numbers of tanks, aircraft and artillery isn't obviously on the cards. The British are struggling to equip themselves.

The danger is that you just get large numbers of ill and malnourished young men, rapidly breaking apart as an army. This would be true for anyone - a Churchill might have wanted to continue the war if Britain had fallen, but it doesn't mean you could suddenly transport 1-2 million men to Canada or India and keep them in fighting condition without British factories churning out equipment.

On the other hand fighting on avoids Mers el Kebir and the British and French Navies (including France's substantial submarine force) operating together should be able to sweep the Italians from the sea (their freedom of action limited only by the Italian air force). This likely ends the North African campaign at a stroke - and places much of Italy under blockade. The threat of raids and invasions anywhere on the Mediterranean would force more garrisons, likely pulling soldiers away from Barbarossa. With less pressure, the British and French could send a more significant force to Asia.

Unfortunately at this point I think you hit something of a wall. The Anglo-French could potentially capture Sicily - but doing dramatically more than this probably depends on the Americans joining the war. Which means everyone will have to wait for them to get organised and transfer over. At some point (say 1943 at the earliest) the Americans could start supplying that million man army in Africa with everything they need - but after 3 years I am not sure what state it would be in.

Sort of my thought. The French Army isn't going to be a player to much more of a degree than OTL. What is significantly different is the Anglo-French threat to Hitler's southern flank. Libya is doomed within six months of the fall of France. The Germans and the Italians may be able to seize Corsica, but at massive cost. I'm not sure whether the next move of the Anglo-French would be in the Balkans (a lot of that depends on Hitler and Mussolini's actions) or recapturing Sardinia and Corsica. Secondly, as you said, Southeast Asia is a whole different game with Indochina firmly allied rather than Vichy.

When I briefly sketched this scenario a few years ago (albeit using the Anglo-French Union POD) I had the Balkans strategy happen, with an Anglo-French expeditionary force going to assist the Greeks against the Italians followed by an economy of force Anglo-French campaign in Yugoslavia. This led to an even less successful Barbarossa, with the Russian turning point coming in early 1942 and everything else happening six months ahead of schedule. The U.S. enters the war in 1942 because of German provocation, the Japanese offensive in SE Asia doesn't happen until the U.S. DOW, and Anglo-French forces land on Corsica and Sardinia in 1942, then Italy and the south of France in 1942. U.S. involvement in Europe is less than OTL, mostly consisting of training and equipping the French Army, but the Americans and Indians are involved in heavy fighting in mainland China and Southeast Asia. The Russians reach the Rhine and link up with Anglo-French forces in 1944.

The postwar order is somewhat less American-dominated than OTL, though the presence of a mostly united Communist Germany makes the Cold War even colder. The interesting series of events at this point is what decolonization looks like, and what this timeline's 'Suez' would be.

 

[varyar]

U.S. involvement in Europe is less than OTL, mostly consisting of training and equipping the French Army, but the Americans and Indians are involved in heavy fighting in mainland China and Southeast Asia. The Russians reach the Rhine and link up with Anglo-French forces in 1944.

Did the presence of Allied troops in mainland China alter the outcome of the Chinese Civil War in your scenario?

 

[Burton K Wheeler]

Did the presence of Allied troops in mainland China alter the outcome of the Chinese Civil War in your scenario?

I would guess that the Nationalists prevail, though China would remain a basket case requiring commitment of U.S. troops.

This was just a really rough sketch intended to create a different Cold War.

Not really relevant to France Fights On, which is a very different type of story than what I was thinking of.

 

[Roger II]

Sort of related-was there any consideration of a flexible defense in interwar France? Something like the Arpad or Mannerheim lines?

 

[Archibald]

Well ok, sorry folks, got carried away. My excuses to all those offended.

. The Germans and the Italians may be able to seize Corsica, but at massive cost.

The battle for Corsica really hangs to a string, on February 17, 1941 an Italo-German bridgehead around Ajaccio is hammered by the MN and RN battleship / BC force, and saved only by a combined RM / LW operations that overwhelms the Franco-British, sinking the MN Bearn and narrowly missing HMS Eagle. Basically the LW is way too much for FAA, Aéronavale, and whatever fighter groups the Armée de l'Air can dispatch.

As for the North African theater, it is over by October 1940 (instead of May 1943 !) and long before the AK ever exists. Rommel is given instead an Albania Korps, but since Albania sounds bad for a Nazi ego, it get rebranded Skanderberg korps !

All the heavy fighting that OTL consumed so many lives, ships, tanks and aircrafts in the sands of North Africa, is moved to Greece and the Balkans, and it is even more ferocious. Crete never fells, since German airborne troops are crippled in Corsica in February (in a fight called Operation Merkur, obviously !)

The issue with the POD as I see it is the manufacturing and logistical base in North Africa. Lets say you could move a substantial portion of the army to Algeria - 1 million or so - this would clearly be a potent force. In OTL I think the Free French mustered 150k, rising to about 300k by 1944? Most of this was equipped with British and then American equipment. Unfortunately French resources are likely to be stretched to breaking point supplying and equipping such a force as anything other than fairly immobile light infantry. Just getting enough food, oil and medical supplies is going to be a challenge. Building large numbers of tanks, aircraft and artillery isn't obviously on the cards. The British are struggling to equip themselves.

Arsenal America is the answer. Surely enough, it will cost one hell of the French gold reserves before Land Lease kicks in. Hell, one of the very few positive aspect of OTL pathetic French collapse is that, well, the country never had the financial burden of paying LL for decades after the war (I heard GB last payments were made in 2006, for f.ck sake)

 

[Burton K Wheeler]

Well ok, sorry folks, got carried away. My excuses to all those offended.

The battle for Corsica really hangs to a string, on February 17, 1941 an Italo-German bridgehead around Ajaccio is hammered by the MN and RN battleship / BC force, and saved only by a combined RM / LW operations that overwhelms the Franco-British, sinking the MN Bearn and narrowly missing HMS Eagle. Basically the LW is way too much for FAA, Aéronavale, and whatever fighter groups the Armée de l'Air can dispatch.

As for the North African theater, it is over by October 1940 (instead of May 1943 !) and long before the AK ever exists. Rommel is given instead an Albania Korps, but since Albania sounds bad for a Nazi ego, it get rebranded Skanderberg korps !

All the heavy fighting that OTL consumed so many lives, ships, tanks and aircrafts in the sands of North Africa, is moved to Greece and the Balkans, and it is even more ferocious. Crete never fells, since German airborne troops are crippled in Corsica in February (in a fight called Operation Merkur, obviously !)

Arsenal America is the answer. Surely enough, it will cost one hell of the French gold reserves before Land Lease kicks in. Hell, one of the very few positive aspect of OTL pathetic French collapse is that, well, the country never had the financial burden of paying LL for decades after the war (I heard GB last payments were made in 2006, for f.ck sake)

I remember you explaining the North Africa and Balkans theaters like that. I thought that part sounded eminently reasonable. Same with the U.S. as the agent for French rearmament, though one wonders how politically feasible that would be on the French side. Is there a senior politician or military officer with American ties who can smooth out the relationship?

 

[Archibald]

though one wonders how politically feasible that would be on the French side.

In the 30's ? no issues whatsoever. French-right or French-left governments had absolutely no ideological issues with buying shitload of american aircrafts and tanks and everything else.

This explain by the utterly catastrophic state of the armement industry in the 30's. What's worse, Pierre Cot and Le Front Populaire added utter chaos and madness to the industry, trying to improve it.
The SNCA (Société Nationales de Construction d'Avions) were byzantine and Kafka at the same time.
Recently I did some research on Potez, and laughed my arse off in despair. After 1936, there were two Potez. There was a "public Potez" led by... Henry Potez himself, and a "private Potez" led by Jacques Chirac father, Abel François Chirac. This was absolute madness. The aircraft industry was gutted and dismembred, then the limbs and bits were glued together into geography-driven, Frankenstein-look-alike industries, the SNCAs.

What is really interesting is that the massive buyouts started in 1938 with the Curtiss H-75s, the NA-16 trainers, and the pair of bombers (Martin 167F and DB-7). As for the tanks, there was a very serious project to build a big plant in Savannah.

Fighting in France stops at the Spanish border, near the mediterranean coast, on august 8, 1940. The decision to keeps fighting, the turning point, happens nearly two months earlier, on June 13. During those seven weeks, two orders are applied a) scorched Earth policy near the battlefront, when the German invade and b) any useful idustry that can be moved, is send to North Africa.
Makes no mistake, the initial goal in moving the industry is to produce weapons in North Africa. And it miserably fails, per lack of basic industry there (foundries). So the real answer is Arsenal America, until 1944 and the end of the war.

 

[Burton K Wheeler]

In the 30's ? no issues whatsoever. French-right or French-left governments had absolutely no ideological issues with buying shitload of american aircrafts and tanks and everything else.

This explain by the utterly catastrophic state of the armement industry in the 30's. What's worse, Pierre Cot and Le Front Populaire added utter chaos and madness to the industry, trying to improve it.
The SNCA (Société Nationales de Construction d'Avions) were byzantine and Kafka at the same time.
Recently I did some research on Potez, and laughed my arse off in despair. After 1936, there were two Potez. There was a "public Potez" led by... Henry Potez himself, and a "private Potez" led by Jacques Chirac father, Abel François Chirac. This was absolute madness. The aircraft industry was gutted and dismembred, then the limbs and bits were glued together into geography-driven, Frankenstein-look-alike industries, the SNCAs.

What is really interesting is that the massive buyouts started in 1938 with the Curtiss H-75s, the NA-16 trainers, and the pair of bombers (Martin 167F and DB-7). As for the tanks, there was a very serious project to build a big plant in Savannah.

Fighting in France stops at the Spanish border, near the mediterranean coast, on august 8, 1940. The decision to keeps fighting, the turning point, happens nearly two months earlier, on June 13. During those seven weeks, two orders are applied a) scorched Earth policy near the battlefront, when the German invade and b) any useful idustry that can be moved, is send to North Africa.
Makes no mistake, the initial goal in moving the industry is to produce weapons in North Africa. And it miserably fails, per lack of basic industry there (foundries). So the real answer is Arsenal America, until 1944 and the end of the war.

I'm guessing the French Army would start its buildup in early 1941, roughly coincident with the start of Lend-Lease. Do you think the decision to go all in on a U.S. supply chain would be made then, or would it take a year or two?

 

[Hendryk]

What is really interesting is that the massive buyouts started in 1938 with the Curtiss H-75s, the NA-16 trainers, and the pair of bombers (Martin 167F and DB-7).

In fact, if the Wikipedia article is to be trusted, it was thanks to the French that the Douglas A-20/DB-7 entered production at all:

The Model 7B was maneuverable and fast, but did not attract any US orders.

The model attracted the attention of a French Purchasing Commission visiting the United States seeking aircraft for the modernization of the Armee de l'Air in the wake of the Munich Crisis. The French discreetly participated in the flight trials, so as not to attract criticism from American isolationists. The Air Corps, which controlled the aircraft's development, but had been excluded from negotiations between the French, the Production Division, and the Navy's Bureau of Aeronautics, was directed by the White House on 19 January 1939 to release the DB-7 for assessment in contradiction of its own regulations. The "secret" was revealed when the Model 7B crashed on 23 January while demonstrating single-engine performance. The French were still impressed enough to order 100 production aircraft, with the order increased to 270 when the war began.

 

[Archibald]

I'm guessing the French Army would start its buildup in early 1941, roughly coincident with the start of Lend-Lease. Do you think the decision to go all in on a U.S. supply chain would be made then, or would it take a year or two?

As they say in Interstellar "this is no time for caution"

The decision to go all out on a U.S supply chain is made right from the summer 1940, months before Lend Lease, at the cost of gold reserves (reserves that are NOT scattered all over the planet as happened OTL.)

- first because there is simply no other viable option (the British, too, are fighting for their lives, while the French industry has just been gutted to cross the Mediterranean sea)

- second, because there is just no time left to breath. While Italy is being crushed out of North Africa as early as October 1940, the LW starts an intensive "blitz" on North Africa, and then as early as January 1941, huge battles starts boiling up in the Mediterranean - Corsica, Greece and Balkans fronts erupts more or less at the same time.
On top of that, on the other side of the planet, Thailand becomes another ennemy, with the "spring incident" prelude to the Pacific theater. So France now has four major battles raging at the same time.

Whatever military gear that was salvaged out of France is mostly consumed and dead by mid-1941 - be it B1bis tanks Somua S-35, D-520 fighters, or bombers. Massive orders of P-40s and P-51s, of bombers, and Franco-American tanks, fills the gaps and ultimately the entire French Armies runs on american gear.
I'll try to dug some detail about the Savannah tank plant and their products.

 

[Archibald]

This really blew my mind, because most of the events you describe, most of the scenario here, looks like straight out of FFO. I mean, the conclusions are the same.
This is quite funny when you think about it, but may explains because the POD date are quite similar - the Anglo-french alliance was touted in the despair of mid-June 1940, exact same moment as FFO very own POD.

Every "check" mean convergent developments.

When I briefly sketched this scenario a few years ago (albeit using the Anglo-French Union POD)
I had the Balkans strategy happen, with an Anglo-French expeditionary force going to assist the Greeks against the Italians followed by an economy of force Anglo-French campaign in Yugoslavia.
(check !)

This led to an even less successful Barbarossa, with the Russian turning point coming in early 1942 and everything else happening six months ahead of schedule.
(check 2.0)

The U.S. enters the war in 1942 because of German provocation, the Japanese offensive in SE Asia doesn't happen until the U.S. DOW
(no check there, and I can see why - the 1940 and 1941 embargoes that led to P.H were related to French Indochina invasion. I admit this remains a tricky point in the FFO scenario).

-- and Anglo-French forces land on Corsica and Sardinia in 1942, then Italy and the south of France in 1942.
(check 3.0 - FFO got september 1943. amazing)


U.S. involvement in Europe is less than OTL, mostly consisting of training and equipping the French Army, but the Americans and Indians are involved in heavy fighting in mainland China and Southeast Asia.
(check 4.0 - FFO achieved that to, we got ride of Mao and gave Chang amries a much needed clean-up and shot in the arm)

The Russians reach the Rhine and link up with Anglo-French forces in 1944.
(check 5.0 - same conclusion, the war ended in 1944, too - although perhaps not on the Rhine, admittedly. Depends whether FFO alternate Overlord, in southern France, gets bogged down in the Rhone valley)

What's more, there is a non-FFO, independant TL that develops your scenario - Dunois "The sword of freedom" also once on AH.com. Dunois later joined FFO as a forum member, but has not contributed much so far.

 

[Burton K Wheeler]

You spotted a typo, I meant the landings in mainland France and Italy to be 1943.

Dunois' TL was one of my inspirations, but it didn't really go as far as I'd like. The idea of a postwar Anglo-French Commonwealth serving as a bulwark against Communist Germany with a fraught relationship with the U.S. and trouble in the colonies is a very appealing one to me.

My differences with FFO are, it seems, the Pacific war. I could be convinced that the Japanese might attack Indochina, but it seems very unlikely, if France and Britain have a strong defensive alliance and are committed to its defense. Doubly unlikely if Roosevelt decides Hanoi would be a fine place for the U.S. to park a division.

Secondly, I can't see Germany being more successful in Russia with a bleeding Mediterranean ulcer, both in the western Med and the Balkans, which means the Russians are going to be driven less far back and turn the tide earlier. I guess having the invasion of mainland Europe coming a year earlier might let the Anglo-French cross the Rhine, but I was picturing less wholesale U.S. support and the liberation of all of France being a priority before driving a dagger straight at the heart of Germany. I admit not putting that much work into this.

 

[Archibald]

As I said earlier, I can see why FIC and P.H were linked, and I recognize as a tricky point in FFO. I posted upthread a couple of links and threads by on the three FFO "founding father", Loic Mahe, who discuss that sore point.

This led to an even less successful Barbarossa, with the Russian turning point coming in early 1942 and everything else happening six months ahead of schedule.

I note that our Barbarossas are not the same. In FFO Barbarossa has been pushed by 11 months, from June 22, 1941 to May 17, 1942.
The reason is what you describes, but in reverse: Germany suffers from that bleeding ulcer in the Mediterranean, and it starts from February 1941 onwards in Corsica - or even before since the italians are crushed and badly threatened on their territory right from the fall of 1940. In fact not only Corsica only falls in March 1941, but Sardinia is briefly invaded by the Allies in the fall of 1940, to Mussolini great dismay. Both islands are retaken by the Axis at the same time, in the same battle lasting for a month, in February - March 1941.
Those two battles are a butchery of French, British and Italian warships, to the point the official account of the battle, 10 years after, is called "A blue mass grave: the fight for the Mediterranean" (Un grand cimetière bleu).

Barbarossa ends being postponed by nearly a year.

 

[Burton K Wheeler]

As I said earlier, I can see why FIC and P.H were linked, and I recognize as a tricky point in FFO. I posted upthread a couple of links and threads by on the three FFO "founding father", Loic Mahe, who discuss that sore point.



I note that our Barbarossas are not the same. In FFO Barbarossa has been pushed by 11 months, from June 22, 1941 to May 17, 1942.
The reason is what you describes, but in reverse: Germany suffers from that bleeding ulcer in the Mediterranean, and it starts from February 1941 onwards in Corsica - or even before since the italians are crushed and badly threatened on their territory right from the fall of 1940. In fact not only Corsica only falls in March 1941, but Sardinia is briefly invaded by the Allies in the fall of 1940, to Mussolini great dismay. Both islands are retaken by the Axis at the same time, in the same battle lasting for a month, in February - March 1941.
Those two battles are a butchery of French, British and Italian warships, to the point the official account of the battle, 10 years after, is called "A blue mass grave: the fight for the Mediterranean" (Un grand cimetière bleu).

Barbarossa ends being postponed by nearly a year.

That sounds more plausible than my scenario, which was a barely educated guess

 

[Loïc]

Good evening.

I'm Loïc Mahé, indeed one of the three creators of FFO.
Since there are no plans at the moment to publish our story in English, I've decided to post here a very summarized timeline of FFO and of course explain our choices and answer questions.
I hope my English isn't too rusty!

Just a few words for the moment:
- about the POD (turning point): the (fictional) car accident where Paul Reynaud's mistress (H. de Portes) and his collaborator Paul de Villelume die occurs on 6th June (please note that the lady died OTL on 28th in a car accident after Reynaud was replaced by Pétain). Of course, this is not going to change history immediately, but it is known that these two had a bad influence on Reynaud at a critical point (after Dunkirk and the breakthrough of the Weygand Line). So, things continue as OTL for a few days (govt leaving Paris, plans to evacuate men and weapons to North Africa, evacuation of the gold reserves, etc).
On the 10th, Weygand tries to force the govt to ask for an armistice since he believes the failure comes from politicians, not the army. A more determined Reynaud, backed by De Gaulle and others, can fire Weygand and replace him by Huntziger (this was considered OTL).
On the front, there are some marginal changes which begin to occur a minor delay for the Germans (from a couple of hours to one day max), because the new high command (Huntziger) takes somes decisions with the clear idea to buy time in order to help the evacuation.
The major POD occurs in the night of June 12th to 13th, with Pétain trying to impose his views and being arrested as a traitor (please note Clemenceau took similar actions in 1918).
After this, changes become more radical, but it has to be noted that no miracle is possible and that the Germans will mostly be delayed by logistics and the last French potent forces (including aircrafts, as more and more D-520 are available), which won't have been backstabbed by Pétain "the hero of Verdun" asking to stop fighting.
- why is FFO not very far from OTL? Well, we had the idea to simulate the whole WW2 on a detailed basis and we didn't want to allow a heroic France beating in the end Germany (and Italy) alone, or even with Great Britain, since these two important countries had lost the land battle in May 1940. So, no best case for France. Moreover, in order to draw a plausible simulation, we had to rely on historical documents and no invent everything in our fertile minds. So, no production of tanks, planes, etc in North Africa (and that's only an example), even if this *might* have been possible (on the mid/long term).
Of course, every French, starting from myself, would love to see the Germans stopped dead in the Ardennes and Germany loosing the war in 1941, against opponents which have, with enough time, much more men and money. Or even before 1941, if the Wehrmacht overthrows Hitler if the battle of France is lost. But this would be another story and could be writen only with a very simplified point of view (pure fiction), because materials would be lacking . For example, we have a rough idea of the French production in 1941, but not after. Another example: what will do Stalin if France is not beaten in 1940?

That's enough for now!

 

[Loïc]

Good evening.

FFO (France fights on) timeline for 1940, with main events only.

June 1940 :
- France takes the decision to retreat to North Africa (but of course still hold Corsica)
- Pétain is politically neutralized by those who want to continue war (Reynaud, Blum, Mandel, De Gaulle, etc). After his failure, he blows an aneurysm and get comatose, he will die in October without ever regaining consciousness.(thanks to Archibald for the correction).
- Soviet Union imposes a cooperation with the Baltic states and forces Romania to give her Bessarabia and northern Bucovina
- Italian attack against France, a bit latter than OTL

July 1940 :
- The German army reaches Bordeaux, Toulouse and Marseille at the end of the month ; the Italian army is still stuck in the Alps
- Joint British-French attack on Libya
- Romania joins the Axis
- Roosevelt signs the Two Oceans Navy act
- Soviet Union annexes the Baltic states

August 1940 :
- End of the battle of France (the 7th August)
- A collaborationist government is formed in occupied France under Pierre Laval
- Allied landing on Lampedusa (success) and Pantelleria (failure)
- French-Polish landing in Sardinia and quick conquest of most of the island
- Joint British-French air attack on Taranto harbor (with more damage than OTL)
- Italian troops in East Africa attack Kenya
- Japanese ultimatum to the French governor of Indochina, ordering to stop any support to China ; French refusal, backed by British and US diplomatic support
- Romania is forced to give northern Transylvania to Hungary

September 1940 :
- Italian troops in East Africa attack Sudan
- British and French begin to target Italian Dodecanese islands
- Beginning of the Battle of Britain (which will be less intensive than OTL because of the longer Battle of France and the shorter period before bad weather)
- Surrender of the last Italian troops in Libya
- Romania is forced to give nsouthern Dobroudja to Bulgary
- Tripartite Pact between Germany, Italy and Japan

October 1940 :
- Surrender of Italian Dodecanese islands and of the last Italian troops in Sardinia
- Pro-German Coup d'état in Romania
- Encounter between Hitler and Mussolini (Brenner Pass) ; Mussolini begs for help, because his leadership in Italy is disputed after the series of setacks
- Encounter between Hitler and Franco (Hendaye), from which nothing emerges, because of exorbitant Spanish requirements (in fact, with the Allies at her doors, Spain will even less than OTL be willing to become a German ally)
- Beginning of talks between the Allies and Greece

November 1940 :
- Allied forces (French, Commonwealth, Belgians from Congo) increase their pressure on Italian East Africa, Italian troops are forced out of Sudan
- End of the Battle of Britain and beginning of the raids on British cities
- Roosevelt wins the US election
- The USA accept to switch to Lend-Lease for the Allies (in practical terms from March 1941 on)
- New US pressure on Japan about the war in China
- Hungary, Romania and Slovakia sign the Tripartite Pact
- Beginning of talks between the Allies and Yugoslavia

December 1940 :
- Great Britain begins to impose economic sanctions against Irak, whose prime minister (Rachid Ali al-Gaylani) is willing to ally with Germany in order to make his country independent
- Three FliegerKorps begin to relocate in Sicily, Italy and southern France
- Hitler and Mussolini plan the attack on Corsica and Sardinia (operation Merkur)