{"title":"From Phoney Peace to Phoney War, 1938–1940","authors":"Douglas Porch","doi":"10.1017/9781107239098.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"From 1938, French policy suddenly pivoted from a policy of appeasement to one of confrontation with Nazi Germany. But once war was declared on 3 September 1939, Anglo-French governments seemed unable to articulate a strategy to win it. Gamelin’s strategy was to build up an impregnable defense of the Hexagon, mount an economic blockade of Germany, and fight a war on the periphery – la guerre ailleurs – until the enemy was enfeebled and the Allies had amassed enough military power take the offensive. But without a Soviet alliance, this strategy failed to pressure Germany and was vulnerable to preemption. The frenzy of mobilization followed by the serenity of Sitzkrieg hollowed out civil resolve and basically neutered the “primordial violence, hatred, and enmity” of the population which Clausewitz argued was essential to the successful waging of war. The drôle de guerre seemed to offer evidence of the drift of Allied policy that portended a lack of national resolve. Daladier stood as a bulwark against military reform and the removal of Gamelin, and encouraged wishful thinking about the ability of Poland to defend itself and the unpopularity in Germany of Hitler’s aggressive policies, which would restrain German aggression. While it appeared on the surface that France had recovered its nerve, the spirit of appeasement in the guise of “victory without combat” hovered over the French declaration of war and lingered in the form of an absence of urgency that affected morale in the long winter of 1939–1940. It also encouraged a flirtation with peripheral operations that culminated in the Narvik fiasco in May 1940, which offered a curtain raiser for the Fall of France.","PeriodicalId":475906,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge University Press eBooks","volume":"1 1","pages":"60-123"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cambridge University Press eBooks","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/9781107239098.003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
From 1938, French policy suddenly pivoted from a policy of appeasement to one of confrontation with Nazi Germany. But once war was declared on 3 September 1939, Anglo-French governments seemed unable to articulate a strategy to win it. Gamelin’s strategy was to build up an impregnable defense of the Hexagon, mount an economic blockade of Germany, and fight a war on the periphery – la guerre ailleurs – until the enemy was enfeebled and the Allies had amassed enough military power take the offensive. But without a Soviet alliance, this strategy failed to pressure Germany and was vulnerable to preemption. The frenzy of mobilization followed by the serenity of Sitzkrieg hollowed out civil resolve and basically neutered the “primordial violence, hatred, and enmity” of the population which Clausewitz argued was essential to the successful waging of war. The drôle de guerre seemed to offer evidence of the drift of Allied policy that portended a lack of national resolve. Daladier stood as a bulwark against military reform and the removal of Gamelin, and encouraged wishful thinking about the ability of Poland to defend itself and the unpopularity in Germany of Hitler’s aggressive policies, which would restrain German aggression. While it appeared on the surface that France had recovered its nerve, the spirit of appeasement in the guise of “victory without combat” hovered over the French declaration of war and lingered in the form of an absence of urgency that affected morale in the long winter of 1939–1940. It also encouraged a flirtation with peripheral operations that culminated in the Narvik fiasco in May 1940, which offered a curtain raiser for the Fall of France.
从1938年起,法国的政策突然从绥靖政策转向对抗纳粹德国。但是,一旦1939年9月3日宣战,英法两国政府似乎无法阐明赢得战争的战略。甘末林的策略是建立一个坚不可摧的六边形防御体系,对德国进行经济封锁,并在外围地区打一场战争——la guerre ailleurs——直到敌人被削弱,盟军积累了足够的军事力量进行进攻。但如果没有苏联的支持,这一战略未能对德国施加压力,而且很容易遭到先发制人的打击。疯狂的动员之后是平静的锡茨克里格,掏空了民间的决心,基本上消除了克劳塞维茨认为对成功发动战争至关重要的“原始暴力、仇恨和敌意”。drôle de guerre似乎提供了盟军政策变化的证据,预示着国家决心的缺乏。达拉第是反对军事改革和甘末林下台的堡垒,他鼓励人们一厢情愿地认为波兰有能力保卫自己,希特勒的侵略政策在德国不受欢迎,这将限制德国的侵略。表面上看,法国已经恢复了勇气,但在“不战而胜”的幌子下,绥靖精神笼罩着法国的宣战宣言,并以缺乏紧迫感的形式徘徊,在1939年至1940年的漫长冬季影响了士气。它还鼓励了对外围行动的轻浮,这种轻浮在1940年5月的纳尔维克惨败中达到高潮,为法国的灭亡拉开了序幕。