15,697
edits
Changes
no edit summary
====Why did France have Poor Military and Political Leadership?====
In 1940 , the French general staff was led by General Maurice Gamelan, an officer widely respected. A veteran and war hero of the First World War, he was credited with developing the strategy that led to the decisive French victory at the Marne in 1914. He had also tried unsuccessfully, to modernize the army. But Gamelin was suffering from a serious illness, whose symptoms included poor concentration levels, memory loss and other cognitive difficulties . Gamelin’s memoirs, published after the war showed symptoms of paranoia and delusions of grandeur.<ref>Jackson, Julian T. <i>[https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0192805509/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0192805509&linkCode=as2&tag=dailyh0c-20&linkId=aa6895f6029c163adf1d3e187d64e538 The Fall of France: The German Invasion of 1940]</i>. (Oxford UP, 2003), p. 234</ref> The military leadership below Gamelin was generally poor. They were slow to respond to the Germans, and there was a marked reluctance to take any initiative and go on the attack. The political leadership of France was also very poor. According to one French commentator during the war, they could not inspire the French people, they were more interested in fighting among themselves that the Germans.<ref>Jackson, p. 235</ref>
France was bitterly divided between the left and the right. This lack of unity in France was crippling at a crucial juncture in the war. The division also extended to the relationships between the military and political leadership of France. The French Generals were rights wing and distrusted the left wing politicians who ran France. French ministers also did not trust the judgment of their generals. The French officer corps was more worried about a Communist revolution than a German invasion.
For example, General Weygand was more concerned with maintaining social stability in the wake of the German invasion than actually fighting the Germans. Many later accused some French Generals of being traitors. Perhaps the greatest weakness in the French leadership was that they did not have a true war leader; as one Frenchman stated in 1942 they ‘had no Churchill’. If France had a leader of the caliber of Clemenceau in 1940, perhaps the outcome of the Battle of France could have been different. <ref> Why Did the French Army Collapse So Quickly? – <i>Omnibooks Magazine</i>, (London July, 1942), p. 6</ref>
====The Fall of France - What role did Defeatism Playdefeatism play?====
<div class="portal" style='float:right; width:35%'>
They included a failure of leadership, both at the military and the political level. The army of France was not only poorly led but had been equipped with inferior arms and equipment. Moreover, the Maginot Line not only failed to protect France, but it encouraged a defensive mentality that allowed the Germans to take the initiative at crucial points during the invasion. The French public was also bitterly divided.
These political divisions and incompetent leadership convinced many French citizens that their country could not defeat Germany. All these combined factors combined ensured a swift between May and June 1940.
{{MediaWiki:AmNative}}
====References====
<references/>