Fred and Loathing on The Internet

Panzer Divisions Won The Tour De France in 1940

2024-Dec-22

It’s been said before here on the blog that I read these big fat non-fiction books to either learn a great deal about something, or to see some familiar historical characters muck it up in closer detail, or maybe to see them weaved into a greater context. Before reading this book I knew Petain as the hero at the end of WW1. The one French general that came out of that war with some acclaim to his name, and that's about it.

When it comes to Vichy France, I knew it was some sort of collaboration between the French government that capitulated to Nazi Germany in 1940. To be honest, I couldn’t put a timeline of events for France between 1940-1944, when the Americans showed up on the Normandy coast. After that, I know everything that happened between D-Day and the declared Allied victory in Europe. Or course I would. It’s all battles and geopolitical super-power conferences.

I came into this book hoping the author would provide some ground work explaining just what happened in France right before the war, or during the interwar decades before the German blitz.
That did not turn out to be the case at all for France on Trial by Julian Jackson, published in 2023. The author does mention every single event that did happen to the land, people, and governments of France during World War Two. They do not appear in chronological order, nor does the author give a spoon fed summation of what happened to France in the war. Instead everything is talked about as if the audience is well aware of the civil procedure of France’s Third Republic, and the big name events of France’s resistance/occupation. As if the reader was a member of the gallery for the trial of Phillipe Petain, held in the summer of 1945; starting before the War in The Pacific had even finished.

My gut tells me the reason why I, somebody well versed in all the theaters of WW2, is lacking in knowledge about this particular slice of WW2 history is because there was no combat! France rolled over very quickly to the Germans ( we can talk later about who was the ‘France’ that rolled over. I learned that from the book ) so there are no examples of the French army fighting the Germans or Italians, or anything as simple as that to tell a six year old. When I was six years old, I did not understand the political intricacies of who was fighting who in the early 1940s. What I could do was name some battles with the combatants and winners.

This is not boasting about me being some six year old history reading prodigy. What I mean is that there were WW2 movies on my TV all the time by the age of 6, and none of them had a story about France winning against an Axis power, or even some triumphant loss that allowed the Germans to zoom into Paris. I knew about Anzio, Iwo Jima, or Omaha Beach because there was some combat action to report in those places. They made movies about them. A clear winner and loser was dramatized with cool looking scenes including tanks, flamethrowers, grizzled men, and hell sometimes even castles!

When I was six I only knew of the word ‘French Resistance’. Not from any cool movies, but references in movies that had Airborne Rangers, submariners, or bomber pilots. If there is a notable action movie illustrating a possible French Resistance event, I am not aware of it.

When I got older and moved into more sophisticated fare than action movies to get my WW2 fix, I turned to books. The themes of action movies somewhat persisted, because reading about the armies took precedence before learning anything else about the war. I was burgeoning in my tastes for treatises on political or demographic necessities of ‘war’. However, those topics still did not seem as interesting as Nazis and Soviets fighting for inches inside a tank factory pumping out T-42s with their guns blazing. I continued to keep my interest about WW2 strictly to the belligerents caught in the act of fighting one another, only now into the more obscure theaters. Well… obscure compared to the American victories that were mentioned in school curriculum, not just Hollywood blockbusters.I became fascinated with mountain jungle fighting in New Guinea, or the sub battles in the Atlantic, or the pilot flying over ‘the Hump’ to get weapons into Chinese defending against Japanese invaders. There was so much to find if you want to hear amazing tales of stuff blowing up.

As I advanced even deeper into political and history books about the antecedents and repercussions of World War Two, I was not uninterested in France. There was no aspect about the war that disinterested me. Mainland France during the war I feel just did not present anything juicy for me to latch on to. France itself began to pop in my readings about the peripheries of World War Two. France ( the French Empire, the French Republic. The nation of France. However you want to think of it) appears in the histories I’ve read as a dinosaur of nineteenth century imperialism trying to hold on to colonial possessions in Vietnam and Algeria. At one point I was an edgy political science student looking for any text that presented the winners of the second world war as the bad guys in the post-war world. France was in third place among imperial powers mentioned.

DuGaulle was a name that showed up in that context after World War 2. At the time he appeared as the stodgy old conservative that was holding back a young France dying to become sexy, swinging, and liberal. Especially 1968! What a year! Turns out DuGaulle was kind of a ‘liberal’ when compared to another stodgy old French general who favors the kepi. Despite having a foothold into the names that were the movers and shakers of this book, I did not know where to place them.

The unsureness I have in the beginning of political history books where I piece together the betrayals, armistices, cease-fires, and treaties debated over remained throughout the book. I never came to a point where I saw all the parts and how they move forward. There was a little bit about the days before the Allies made it to Paris, where Petain was officially shuffled around territory still held by the Nazis. Once he arrived at the trial, the order of events were dictated by how the prosecution or defense counsel brought them forth. The trial was a parade of notable figures from notable events that did not land on me. Instead it splashed around me with hyperbolic courtroom monologues.

Now that I’m a full blown grown up that does not ‘need’ the pretense of guns and/or swords to be interested in a particular bit of history, I ought to be fully receptive about a strict courtroom drama where the war is discussed, but never really explained. Sure, I am that kind of reader, but I sure would have appreciated an explanation of just how the French army gave up and put themselves in a place where Petain thought there’s no option but to capitulate to the Germans. Just how hasty were the decisions Petain made? I was not sure how to judge Petain myself because I don’t know how quickly he folded or how good his cards were.

What I did enjoy finding in this book is the examination of what the political ‘right’ of France desires. In my mind, Charles DuGaulle was a stalwart Catholic that wanted to slow down the changes sweeping through French society after the war, and unparalleled in fame for being such an old French conservative. Turns out he was considered a bit of a ‘liberal’ before cementing himself as the champion of conserving the French empire. I suppose France is ripe with famous lion headed old generals that enter politics from the right wing.

I must admit, I am still a little confused about who from the political leadership of France sided with once the Germans showed up. Obviously anybody to the left of center became part of a ‘resistance’ to the German occupation. What the French conservatives wanted did not seem clear or at least not moving in one direction. I do know some of them were thrilled with the Germans coming in to push things around. Some weren’t crazy about giving so much in the armistice, but thought the German ideas were nifty. I suppose DuGaulle was a ‘conservative’ of his time, but was of the opinion that capitulating is the most shameful act of state possible.

When France surrendered to the Germans, I had just assumed France and its government was of one mind. Then the Germans showed up, won every battle quickly and made demands, leaving Vichy France as a consolation prize put together by compliant French officials so the people could feel like they didn’t lose everything. Also, to save the Germans the hassle of annexing the whole country while they fought the British. I doubt I’ll read this book again. I do wish to find out a little more about the nuts and bolts of how the French, or Petain -a proud marshal of France-got pushed around by the Germans.

The post-trial portion of the book did not need so much backstory about the treaties being signed by a rotating group of collaborationist French politicians, so I could get a better grasp of what was going on or spoken amongst the characters. The last third takes a look into the cult of Petain after his conviction for treason. This tract about post-War French history showed me another semi-Fascist legacy that was engendered by a modern European conservative party. It seems every country had a conservative faction that may not have seen eye-to-eye with the National Socialist Party of Germany, but would have preferred invasion over a worker’s revolt.