The British Army and the Fall of France in 1940: Beyond Blame

The fall of France in 1940 has been subject to much analysis and, at times, harsh criticism. However, assigning blame to any single entity oversimplifies a complex and multifaceted series of events. This article delves into the traditional narratives and examines the roles of the British Army, the French military, and the strategic developments that led to the invasion. By exploring these aspects, we aim to provide a comprehensive understanding of the situation.

The Strategical Context

The nature of warfare had evolved dramatically by the time of the Second World War. The traditional methods of warfare yielded to the innovative Blitzkrieg tactics employed by the German military. Both British and French generals [Note 1] underestimated the impact of these new battlefield tactics. It was the German generals who effectively harnessed and exploited these innovations, leading to a series of victories that culminated in the fall of France.

The British Expeditionary Force (BEF) in France

The British Expeditionary Force (BEF) found itself in Northern France as part of a broader Allied effort to counter the German threat. The strength of the French army was around two million men, a significant force on paper. The BEF, on the other hand, numbered around 300,000 personnel, strategically placed to support the French and Belgian armies.

A significant turning point was the collapse of the Belgian army, which led to the French army being heavily involved in Belgium's defense. Despite the French army's numerical superiority, their deployment was not as effective due to strategic misplacements. By diverting a substantial portion of the French army to support the Belgians who had already collapsed, the French left a large part of their forces vulnerable to encirclement by the Germans.

The Ardennes Forest, a traditionally considered difficult terrain for armored movement, was unexpectedly breached by the Germans. This breach exposed the British flanks and isolated the BEF from the main French forces. The BEF's retreat to Dunkirk became inevitable, and they conducted a valiant counterattack at Arras before withdrawing.

French Tanks and Air Force Performance

The French had an impressive number of tanks and a larger army than the Germans, but they failed to leverage their advantages effectively. World War I tactics, which prioritized massed infantry attacks, were still in play. The French tanks, while numerous, were not as well-equipped as the German ones, and coordination between infantry and tanks was often lacking.

The French air force also played a significant role. Early in the campaign, the Royal Air Force (RAF) faced a formidable task of defending both British and French forces. The RAF's strength lay primarily in mainland UK, and deploying aircraft to France would have risked decimating its own forces. The French air force, despite boasting a large number of aircraft, was under-equipped and undermanned compared to the Luftwaffe and suffered from disorganization and bad coordination.

The Retreat and Evacuation from Dunkirk

The retreat to Dunkirk was a last-ditch effort to avoid catastrophic losses. The BEF, along with elements of the French and Belgian armies, managed to evacuate to the UK. The 51st Highland Division, a British unit, was among the last to fight and surrender, with some units continuing their resistance even after the Dunkirk evacuation. The operation, known as Operation Dynamo, marked a symbolic victory for the British forces.

Not all British soldiers were evacuated, however. Some French and Belgian troops were also retrieved by the Royal Navy and merchant navy forces, highlighting the collaborative nature of the military effort despite the overall defeat.

Lessons Learned and Reflections

Reflections on the fall of France offer insight into the challenges of military strategy and the rapidly evolving nature of warfare. Both British and French forces made critical mistakes in their deployments and strategies. The German success was largely due to strategic brilliance and the use of new military tactics.

The experiences of veterans, like the author's uncle who served with the 2nd Battalion Hampshire Regiment, provide a human perspective on the war effort. Despite the staggering defeat, the bravery and sacrifice of soldiers like these are not diminished. Their experiences remind us of the complexity and the scale of the conflict.

In conclusion, the fall of France was the result of a combination of factors, including strategic missteps, technological advancements, and the sheer forceful application of innovative tactics by the German military. The British Army, while not the primary cause of the fall, played a significant role in the broader Allied strategy and the subsequent evacuation efforts.

References

[Note 1] The failure to anticipate the German blitzkrieg tactics is a testament to the need for continuous adaptation and innovation in military strategy.