WI: Algeria declares for the Allies

[pedmore1202]

What if Algeria, following the Fall of France and the formation of Vichy France, declared for De Gaulle and the Free French.

What impacts would that have on other French Colonies in the region, on the war in North Africa and Mediterraean and the overall course of the war.


Bonus: If Algeria declares for the Allies, but Tunisia (either officially, or absolutely) declares for Vichy. What are the impacts of that?

 

[Zheng He]

This is something I am fuzzy on. How did the forces in a French colony react to the colony's government declaring for Vichy or DeGaulle? Did they just go along or were they split?

Most important for Algeria, what does that mean for the fleet units stationed there?

Also, how does Algeria declaring for the Allies affect Morocco and Dakar?

Just some thoughts...

 

[Imladrik]

Easy. Make Noguès a little bit more willing to refuse the armistice (he only agreed reluctantly in the armistice because it didn't touch the French fleet or the French Empire) or make the armistice tougher on the French, like for example touching the French Fleet or Hitler give Mussolini something.

You can't have Algérie and Tunisie in different sides. The Résident Général de Tunis (head of the French Administration in Tunisie) and the head of the French administration in Algéria both supported Noguès. You can't have one and not the other, especially given that Noguès was the Military leader of troops in all of North Africa.

The following people supported Noguès :
Georges Le Beau, gouverneur général de l'Algérie
Marcel Peyrouton, résident général en Tunisie
Léon Cayla, gouverneur général de l'AOF
Robert Brunot, haut-commissaire au Cameroun
Noguès was both the leader of the army in North Africa and the Résident Général du Maroc

The following Generals (or admirals) wanted to continue the war (but where either overruled by the public administration or did the same thing than Noguès):
général Legentilhomme de la Côte française des Somalis (Djibouti)
général Mittelhauser, commandant en chef du théâtre d'opération de Méditerranée orientale (French forces in Syria and Lebanon)
général Catroux, Gouverneur Général de l'Indochine Française
amiral Darlan, chef d'état major de la Marine

If Noguès choose to fight, you have all of French North Africa with him, the Levant, the AOF, possibly Djibouti and the Indochine, at least a part of the AEF (Tchad and Cameroon), and with luck, the French Fleet. From there you basically have a scenario similar to FFO, but with a weaker France (less evacuations to North Africa) and with different politics.

 

[ghappy1000]

What if Algeria, following the Fall of France and the formation of Vichy France, declared for De Gaulle and the Free French.

What impacts would that have on other French Colonies in the region, on the war in North Africa and Mediterraean and the overall course of the war.


Bonus: If Algeria declares for the Allies, but Tunisia (either officially, or absolutely) declares for Vichy. What are the impacts of that?

Morocco declares for the Free French. No Mers Es Kebir because most of the French Fleet in the Atlantic and Mediterranean declare for the Allies, although the British might temporarily intern French ships in British ports for a period of time as the loyalties of the crewmembers would be dubious.
Fears of Sealion decrease and the French navy fights the Italians. The Free French would first claim Tunisia from Vichy and then, attack the Italians in Libya. By 1941, the North African campaign is over and the Allies launch an invasion of Sicily to decrease Italian morale and Germans send troops to help Italy. WW2 in Europe ends in 1944. But how do you get that, especially since the British don't have enough troops to take the North African colonies for the Free French, plus Algeria declared for Vichy because it was close to Vichy and the troops of Vichy or Italy would attack if it declared for Free France. Not to mention the Italian navy and airforce [most French ships in the Mediterranean were in Algeria otl]. As Tunisia would side with the Free French as well in this case despite geography, the entire French Navy in the Mediterranean would be on the Allied side.

 

[thaddeus]

would think that it demonstrates the Vichy are not in control, regardless of any declarations?

think the logical outcome would be Case Anton brought forward?

at the very least Italy invades Tunisia, possibly Malta and Corsica. which would be better for the Axis than their OTL misadventures in Egypt and Greece.

possibly Spain enters the war to grab Morocco, though Franco was so cautious he might still stall.

if the French fleet joins Free French, this is before the Brits bombed them correct? , could be a turning point in the war with the Italian navy wiped out.

 

[Imladrik]

would think that it demonstrates the Vichy are not in control, regardless of any declarations?

think the logical outcome would be Case Anton brought forward?

Case Anton is a possibility.

at the very least Italy invades Tunisia, possibly Malta and Corsica. which would be better for the Axis than their OTL misadventures in Egypt and Greece.

Italy is not in position to invade Tunisia. There are more French troops in Tunisia in 1940 than there are Italian troops in the Tripolitaine. Also, the Italian amphibious capacities were a joke, so corsica is already hard, while Malta is almost impossible without an heavy german air support (and paratroopers)

possibly Spain enters the war to grab Morocco, though Franco was so cautious he might still stall.

No. Franco won't enter the war to lose Morocco (again, he doesn't have the troops to take on the French troops in Morocco, his country is on his knees, and he need the British and American trade).

if the French fleet joins Free French, this is before the Brits bombed them correct? , could be a turning point in the war with the Italian navy wiped out.

The Italian Navy would stay in it's port as a fleet in being, only to be partly destroyed by planes from north Africa, or from carriers. It would quickly leave the southern italian ports to go north,and would only sortie for very important missions, with the support of the Lufftwaffe.

 

[ghappy1000]

Case Anton is a possibility.



Italy is not in position to invade Tunisia. There are more French troops in Tunisia in 1940 than there are Italian troops in the Tripolitaine. Also, the Italian amphibious capacities were a joke, so corsica is already hard, while Malta is almost impossible without an heavy german air support (and paratroopers)
If Tunisia was under Free French control, yes, if under Vichy control, the Italians try to obtain the Vichy Fleet, but not much of use. Perhaps the Italian troops in Libya launch an offensive into Egypt first, but soon, they recall the troops to defend western Libya. Corsica no doubt falls, but Malta, Free French Algeria means the Italians wouldn't try as most of the French Mediterranean Navy was in Algeria.

 

[Imladrik]

If Tunisia was under Free French control, yes, if under Vichy control, the Italians try to obtain the Vichy Fleet, but not much of use. Perhaps the Italian troops in Libya launch an offensive into Egypt first, but soon, they recall the troops to defend western Libya. Corsica no doubt falls, but Malta, Free French Algeria means the Italians wouldn't try as most of the French Mediterranean Navy was in Algeria.

Like i said, it is impossible for Vichy to control Tunisia and not Algeria, as the same army was defending both and both the head of the administrations of Tunisia and Algeria supported the head of the Army of North Africa (who was also head of the administration in Morocco). North Africa switch as a whole or it doesn't switch.

 

[Essam]

Vichy France's values and positions sit much better with those of the grands colons who de facto controlled French Algeria. And it wouldn't take much to convince the rest of the pieds noirs, with de Gaulle's army of colonials and the iminent threat of full suffrage to the Muslims: this is something they do not have to fear with Vichy's values.

To highlight the extent that the grands colons controlled French Algeria, many credit their power to why the French eventually vacated (as you will never meet a Frenchman who accepts France "lost" the Algerian "War" b/c in France it was just domestic police action): because De Gaulle and Paris could not control the sway the grands colons had over the Assembly and Senate via their representatives.

 

[Simon]

Most important for Algeria, what does that mean for the fleet units stationed there?

The problem with the French fleet is that aside from some notable exceptions such as Vice-Admiral Marcel-Bruno Gensoul who commanded the Force de Raid most of the officers seem to have been severe Anglophobes. Currently in the middle of Colin Smith's England's Last War Against France and shortly after the surrender there does appear to have been a general expectation of, and somewhat understandably something of a desire to see, Britain also being defeated by Germany or at least forced into signing a peace agreement in the months following the Second Armistice at Compiegne.

 

[Viriato]

At least regarding the pieds-noirs many seemed to support or at least tolerate Vichy. With over half of them not being of French origin (mostly Spaniards, Italians and Maltese), they were sometimes looked down upon by ethnic French. Also, it seems that the pieds-noirs were in favor of repealing the Cremieux Decrees of 1870 which had given Jews in Algeria full French citizenship. When they were repealed in 1941, this led many of the Jews there to join the resistance movement. It has been said that the lack of pied-noir support for the Free French was one of the reasons de Gaulle had little sympathy for them.

 

[pedmore1202]

The reason I offered Algeria being Free French while Tunisia declaring for Vichy could be more a political and military option.

You have Algeria (and most of French North Africa) being part of the Allies, so allowing the use of their ports, resources transport links etc.

While Tunisia (officially) is Vichy, and thus has a peace treaty with Germany and Italy, while unofficially working with the Free French to build up defences, troops etc, and prevent Italy from attacking Westwards at the same time

 

[MattII]

If the conflict in North Africa is over by 1941, could we see more forces being shifted east and the Japanese maybe being resisted in Malaya?

 

[Just a Rube]

If the conflict in North Africa is over by 1941, could we see more forces being shifted east and the Japanese maybe being resisted in Malaya?

Assuming Churchill is still in charge, we're more likely to see some sort of crazy scheme to invade Europe (or, if pre-Barbarossa, maybe even Baku). Even though Asia is slated to be reinforced, there will be a sense of "better to focus on the enemy we're fighting right now, rather than shift troops around to deal with possible future threats".

At least, that's always been my opinion about a lot of the Brit-wank "reinforced Singapore" scenarios you see on the board.

 

[Devolved]

The problem for the French is that the legitimate government of France surrendered. Fighting on was basically treason and would jeopordize the home country and make German peace terms even harsher.

De Gaulle was nobody and remained noboby until at least late '42.

The war was over for France and pretty much remained over until the Allies dragged them back in.

 

[MattII]

Assuming Churchill is still in charge, we're more likely to see some sort of crazy scheme to invade Europe (or, if pre-Barbarossa, maybe even Baku). Even though Asia is slated to be reinforced, there will be a sense of "better to focus on the enemy we're fighting right now, rather than shift troops around to deal with possible future threats".

Britain got its clock cleaned the last time they faced off against Germany on the continent, and not much has changed in the meantime.

At least, that's always been my opinion about a lot of the Brit-wank "reinforced Singapore" scenarios you see on the board.

Actually, it's more likely to be ANZAC-wank "reinforced Singapore" scenario.

 

[Imladrik]

as you will never meet a Frenchman who accepts France "lost" the Algerian "War" b/c in France it was just domestic police action

I do. We lost the Algerian War. We lost it for reasons that are mostly non-military but it was still lost.

The problem for the French is that the legitimate government of France surrendered. Fighting on was basically treason and would jeopordize the home country and make German peace terms even harsher.

Actually, the government didn't legitimately surrendered, as their is a provision that votes under the duress of the enemy are void. So basically there was nothing legal in France between 1940 and 1945 and the first elections.

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

The problem for the French is that the legitimate government of France surrendered. Fighting on was basically treason and would jeopordize the home country and make German peace terms even harsher.

De Gaulle was nobody and remained noboby until at least late '42.

The war was over for France and pretty much remained over until the Allies dragged them back in.

Petains government did conduct secret discussions with the US for reentry into the war during 1942. These talks seem to have been between US ambassador Leahey & Darlan while he was prime minister. Later when Darlan was given responsibility for French North Africa Petains guidance to him included permission to take the colonies over to the Allies if the choice was between losing them entirely to Allied control.

The retention of the colonies in the neutral French camp had to do with the expectations Petain came with when a cease fire was requested, & the Armistice terms dictated by Germanys government. A different leader, like Renaud may very well have allowed anti German leaders in the colonies to 'revolt' and reject the armistice. Or as Petain did in late 1942 give earlier the leaders in the colonies secret permission to separate when the opportunity was ripe.