I have NEVER been able to figure out why after France was defeated in WW2 a Vichy Fance was created - WHY?

Question

I know of the desire of Hitler to gain a peace in the west so he could devote all his efforts on the commies thereby needing to appease the west. I know he believed the western allies to be blood brothers and did not want to spill their blood - even hoping to gain their support to fight the commies (which he in fact did raising SS divisions from conquered countries including France, the Scandinavian countries, the Baltic nations after he liberated them from the Soviets, and others, even 2 American brigrades from captured troops later in the war. I know he was worried about losses in his own forces - particularly tanks (which later proved inaccurate as most damaged tanks were in fact repairable in the field). I know these and many more - BUT they just do NOT cut it.

Why did he not just keep it all as well as all the French colonies? To me the benefits far outweighted the potential harm. This has been bugging me for over 35 years and no one has ever given me a reason I could believe.

Answer 1

It is a common misconception that the Vichy regime administered only the unoccupied zone of southern France (named "free zone" (zone libre) by Vichy), while the Germans directly administered the occupied zone. In fact, the civil jurisdiction of the Vichy government extended over the whole of metropolitan France, except for Alsace-Lorraine, a disputed territory which was placed under German administration (though not formally annexed).

Hitler was motivated by a number of reasons to agree to the armistice. He feared that France would continue to fight from North Africa, and he wanted to ensure that the French navy was taken out of the war. In addition, leaving a French government in place would relieve Germany of the considerable burden of administering French territory. Finally, he hoped to direct his attentions toward Britain, where he anticipated another quick victory.

The Vichy government's claim to be the de jure French government was challenged by the Free French Forces of Charles de Gaulle, based first in London and later in Algiers, and French governments ever since have held that the Vichy regime was an illegal government run by traitors. Historians in particular have debated the circumstances of the vote of full powers to Pétain on July 10, 1940. The main arguments advanced against Vichy's right to incarnate the continuity of the French state were based on the pressure exerted by Laval on deputies in Vichy, and on the absence of 27 deputies and senators who had fled on the ship Massilia and could thus not take part in the vote.

Absence of the deputies allowed Petain to obtain power and it was this and the refusal of the commander-in-chief, General Maxime Weygand, to fight on from North Africa and who insisted that the responsibility of the government was to remain in France and share the misfortune of its people, that brought about Vichy France.

Answer 2

There were NO American Brigades within the German Armed Forces.  There were however 60 British former POW's in an SS unit called 'The British Friekorps'.

Will cover the Vichy French later.  It's a long answer, it's late.  Will answer tomorrow.   :)

Answer 3

The Vichy government was set up by the n***s much as was the Quisling government in Norway: a n**i surrogate and puppet with some of the appearance of being (respectively) French and Norwegian.

The Vichy government provided personnel and materiel support for the n**i cause and, in the invasion of North Africa, actually fought the Allied forces on behalf of the n***s ( probably killing more Americans than the French ever did Germans in WWII ).

The word is "collaborationist" for both Vichy and Quisling.

Answer 4

France didn't have a chance against the German at that time and bowed to the inevitable.  Hitler saw the East as Germany's door from entrapment.  He needed the Atlantic sea lanes and the coasts from the Med to the North Cape.

But Hitler, though he possessed some exceptional abilities, has to be viewed from a personal view also.  His biggest tactical error was probably Dunkirk, where he had most of Britain's army trapped.

He followed the pattern, it seems to me, of the fanatic:  when the tide turned against him, he became more and more obsessed with the actual life of a victor, as if some magic would return to certify his terrible error, followed by a growing crescendo of set-backs.  He couldn't believe that the WWI loss was, on his watch, to be followed by something much worse.  what criminal doesn't see his own life in a tainted glow of understanding.

Answer 5

It was a clever bit of statecraft.  (Don't accuse Hitler of anything clever; probably one of his underlings came up with it.)  In Vichy France, the n***s created a puppet state with leaders whose values were very right-wing-conservative, or very close in values to the n***s themselves.  Suddenly, there was a class of Frenchmen in charge who had a stake in Hitler's success, and stood to lose much if Hitler failed.

As for why not take over all of France completely and her colonies, well....Hitler's goal was to find Leibensraum, or

'living room', for the German people.  He thought of the Russians as having a very 'weak' culture, so they could be easily assimilated or enslaved, leaving lots of free land right next door.  But France had a 'strong' culture (one of the 4 beginners of civilization, with Greece, England, and Germany), so they would be very difficult to assimilate...besides, not much land Germans would want to live on....So his best bet would be to just keep France quiet, and concentrate on conquering Russia.

Answer 6

The FLEET dude, the French FLEET!

If he could get the French to cooperate, he'd get access to their fleet-a massive boost to his fledgling navy.

The British nixed it by attacking the indecisive French fleet at anchor.

Answer 7

Alot of this was due to many French leaders accepting defeat and Hitler decided instead of seeming such a bad guy he created Vichy France and expected Britain to sue for peace. Also in addition by reaching a deal with the French leadership he was able to avoid taking over every square inch of france and then taking Africa which would divert Italian forces from Egypt. The French leadership also figured they would lose France if they fought so they decided to keep 1/3rd of it and keep their colonies if they accepted Hitler's demands, however Charles du Gualle didn't think that and thus Free France was still there. Hitler didn't expect to have to devise a plan to invade Britain but knew he was eventually going to fight the Soviet Union and Hitler effectively saved many troops and got many most key French cities he didn't even have to fight for with of course the exception of a few nice ones like Marseilles, Toulouse, etc. and Africa of course but to garrison Africa could have been a nightmare with Belgian Congo and South Africa.

Answer 8

It was a question of man power.

His intention was always to extend his empire to the east and he knew he would need all his resources for this so he occupied northern France and the coastal areas where any threat from Britain  might arise and was happy to find a group of French politicians who would collaborate and keep the rest of the country subdued.

He gave them the illusion of power but they knew the realities of the situation.

After D-Day the Germans changed the rules.

Answer 9

I have always been under the impression that the Germans allowed the creation of Vichy France as a puppet that would still be "French", thus possibly alleviating some of the problems with being an occupier.

It also allowed the Germans to have a lot of extra manpower in the form of the Vichy military.  While the Vichy troops didn't serve outside of Vichy territory, they did provide a garrison for a very large tract of land (most of southern France and the African colonies).  Had the Germans simply occupied the whole country they probably would have had to do more fighting in the south, and they would have had to garrison the area with German troops.

It is also doubtful that they would have been able to get to the African or Middle Eastern colonies, which would have allowed those countries to be used as Free French and English bases.

Edit:  I think that dismissing Hitler as a madman or insane is a cop out.  People don't get into the position he was in by being insane.  He must have been clever and charismatic, otherwise it makes no sense that an entire nation would follow him.  Plus, he was widely admired around the world, even here in the US (and FDR), up until the invasion of Poland.

Answer 10

haha... fool.... you're letting yourself be agitated by the lack of reason in the actions of a madman.

Answer 11

Hitler's view of a 'new world order' revolved around the so-called Aryan racial superiority, over the slavs from the east, the jews and other undesireables.  The French, British and Scandinavian countries had their roots from german barbarian tribes and thus were in line for his new world order.  Rather than be slaves, they would be partners in the new order in Europe,  But like someone mentioned above, how much stock or logic can you put into a madman?