The swift collapse of France in the face of the Nazi German invasion in May 1940 remains a deeply perplexing and debated historical event. Just months after the commencement of the “Phoney War,” the seemingly impenetrable French defenses crumbled with astonishing speed. By June 22, 1940, France, once considered a military powerhouse, signed an armistice with Nazi Germany under Marshal Philippe Pétain’s government, ushering in a dark era of collaboration. But Why Did France Fall So Easily To The Nazis?
To understand this pivotal moment in history, we delve into a discussion with historian Michaël Bourlet, formerly a professor at the Saint-Cyr Coëtquidan military academy. Professor Bourlet challenges popular misconceptions and offers a nuanced perspective on the true reasons behind France’s rapid defeat.
Debunking the Myth of an Ill-Prepared French Army
A prevalent narrative suggests that the French army in 1940 was woefully unprepared for the German onslaught. This perspective often paints a picture of a poorly equipped and unmotivated force overwhelmed by the seemingly invincible Wehrmacht. However, Professor Bourlet argues that this is a myth, largely propagated by the Vichy regime to excuse their collaboration.
Alt text: French soldiers during the Phoney War, highlighting the myth of French unpreparedness before the 1940 Nazi invasion.
“The idea that the army was badly prepared, poorly motivated and ill-equipped against the invincible Wehrmacht is a myth constructed by Pétain’s Vichy regime,” Bourlet explains. “Unfortunately, it’s still used today, because it makes a good excuse: it’s so much easier to admit defeat if you say you had a weak army facing a much stronger one.”
In reality, the French army was a formidable force. It boasted five million men, exceeding its troop numbers from World War I. France had significantly increased its defense spending throughout the 1930s, investing in a modern air force, a powerful navy, and a well-equipped army. The Maginot Line, a vast fortification system along the eastern border, stood as a testament to French defensive capabilities.
The French high command was not idle. They developed a strategy based on defined objectives, continuous fronts, and the effective use of firepower. Therefore, the narrative of a completely unprepared French army is a misleading oversimplification.
Courage and Tenacity on the Battlefield: Challenging Perceptions of French Soldiers
Another damaging perception is that the French army lacked courage in 1940. While acknowledging that some commanders faltered and some units succumbed to panic, Professor Bourlet emphasizes that, for the most part, French soldiers fought bravely and resolutely.
Alt text: French soldiers manning a trench during the Battle of France, showcasing their bravery and resilience against the German forces.
The intensity of the fighting is underscored by the casualty figures. Approximately 60,000 French soldiers perished between May and June 1940. The German military also suffered significant losses, including an estimated 30 percent of their tanks and aircraft, and tens of thousands of casualties. These statistics paint a picture of fierce battles and significant French resistance, contradicting the notion of a cowardly army.
Episodes of French Success and Determined Resistance
Despite the overall defeat, the Battle of France was not devoid of French successes and instances of determined resistance. The French army achieved a clear victory against the Italian army on the Alpine front in June 1940. Furthermore, in several battles, French forces inflicted considerable damage and delays on the German advance.
One notable example is the fighting around Stonne in the Ardennes. From May 15 to 27, French forces launched repeated counterattacks against the flank of the German offensive after the breakthrough at Sedan. The village of Stonne changed hands multiple times, with the French fiercely contesting the German advance and inflicting significant losses, even though they ultimately failed to break through.
Alt text: Battle of Stonne map, illustrating the repeated French attempts to recapture the village and disrupt the German offensive in May 1940.
Another example of French resilience is found in the Battle of the Scheldt in Belgium. French infantry divisions successfully prevented the Germans from crossing the Scheldt Canal between May 21 and 26, delaying the Wehrmacht’s northward progress. Similarly, the six infantry divisions of the French 1st Army, encircled near Lille, fought until June 1, significantly aiding the British Expeditionary Force’s evacuation from Dunkirk. These episodes demonstrate that the French army was capable of effective fighting and resistance.
The Real Reasons for the Rapid French Defeat: Doctrine and Strategy
If the French army was not ill-prepared or lacking in courage, then why did France fall so easily to the Nazis? Professor Bourlet argues that the fundamental reasons for the defeat were “intellectual and doctrinal.” The French high command, deeply influenced by the lessons of World War I, failed to adapt to the new realities of warfare in 1940.
Alt text: German Panzer tanks advancing rapidly through France in 1940, showcasing the effectiveness of Blitzkrieg tactics in overwhelming French military doctrine.
“It’s the old cliché of fighting the previous war,” Bourlet states. “Commanders were too focused on lessons from the First World War; they couldn’t think about the actual war they had to wage in the present. They were unable to adapt. The Germans – by contrast – took risks.”
The German military adopted a daring and innovative strategy. They concentrated their armored divisions in the Ardennes, a terrain considered difficult for tanks, positioning them between the Maginot Line and the main French army. This audacious move caught the French by surprise. The Germans then executed a rapid breakthrough through the Ardennes, outflanking the French forces who had moved north into Belgium to counter the expected German advance. This maneuver encircled the Allied armies, pushing them towards the English Channel and ultimately leading to the collapse of the French front.
In conclusion, the fall of France was not a result of a weak or cowardly army. Instead, it stemmed from a failure of strategic thinking and doctrinal rigidity within the French high command. The French military, while possessing considerable strength and fighting spirit, was ultimately outmaneuvered and out-thought by the innovative and risk-taking German Wehrmacht. Understanding this nuanced perspective is crucial to comprehending the complexities of this pivotal moment in World War II history.
