After WW II, the major powers were the US, UK, and USSR. Yet France was given an occupation zone...?

Question

...in West Germany. Why wasn't Canada given an occupation zone, given that Canada contributed more troops and victories than France did? Canadians played a big part in D-Day with 3 entire divisions, while France had no divisions of their own.

Answer 1

De Gaulle.

As you know, France was defeated by the Axis in 1940. Its citizens continued to resist and many of the country's soldiers, sailors and airmen fled to Britain or other free areas to continue the fight after France fell.

De Gaulle was one of several leaders of the Free French, but he was the one who emerged as the overall leader and spokesman for France. Partly as a gesture and partly as an attempt to restore France to its prewar power, the Allies allowed France to regain its former empire, to be an occupying power and to be given a position of preference in the postwar world.

Canada largely participated as a part of the British Empire, even though it was independent as a member of the British Commonwealth of Nations. Canada was in effect represented in the occupation as a part of the United Kingdom.

Canada's role in World War II was not limited to its three divisions on D-Day. Many of the aircraft and ships that helped Britain survive and regain an offensive were built in Canada, and many Canadians risked their lives alongside British flyers in the Battle of Britain.

Canada has every right to be proud of its role in World War II, and I am proud to have many Canadian friends who have been supporters and allies of the United States.

As an aside, I have Canadian relatives--in Alberta--and my father's family immigrated by way of Canada.

Answer 2

Prior to the start of the Second World War, France was in possession of the largest military in Europe. They had more technology and more men in uniform than anyone, the Nazis included. After 1938 however the tide changed in Hitler's favor and for a variety of reasons, the most important being the French leadership having no idea how to fight mechanized warfare, Hitler brought the otherwise powerful Third Republic to it's knees. Now the term "Third Republic" is an important distinction to make because there is three very different French Nation States over the decade of the 1940s and beyond that was the massive French Empire all of which need to be considered.

So anyway, when Hitler wiped out the Third Republic, concerned elites in France formed a provisional government which today is known as Collaborationist or Vichy France in North America, but is most aptly named the Fourth Republic. Their decision to accept Nazi Dominion over their own territory and the occupation of Northern France brought havoc to the entire Empire as people began to question all their political assumptions. Immediately after the military evacuation from Dunkirk however, new factions began to form which morphed into what was called the "Free French" under de Gaulle. Soon loyalties began to be delineated throughout the empire (where a huge segment of the French military was waiting for orders). Some followed Vichy, some followed de Gaulle. Overtime, more and more of them fell in line with de Gaulle however which although that didn't make him a European power, it certainly did make him the major naval and African one. So when the war was all said and done and the new Fifth Republic was formed, even though de Gaulle was leader of a ruined homeland, he still had massive imperial resources. They were indeed a world power, however weakened.

That said, Canada did indeed make more a contribution to the European War then the French did. Why they did not get an occupation zone however has everything to do with the role we had at the time. I'll try an do it in point form for brevity:
1. Although we contributed a huge amount of resources to the European Air War, it was done so entirely under the auspices of the RAF and not the fledgling RCAF which never officially left the continent. Sure we had our own bomber division, our own fighter units, our own officers, but first and foremost, the served the King and the war effort; not Canada. The British had the technology and the expertise to make our air war happen and for expediency's sake, we followed the British lead. You should note there were other countries that followed suit as well who were not members of the Commonwealth/Empire. Norway, Poland, and the Free French are all prime examples of this.
2. The RCN at the time was largest fleet on the ocean at the end of the war with the lone exceptions of the USN and the RN respectively. Sheer tonnage however is a very poor indicator of quality in this respect. Our fleet was composed almost entirely of the ad hoc "Corvette" class ships. These were small, not so swift, lightly armoured boats made out of an "off the shelf" whaling ship hull. Over the course of the war, RCN engineers had done alot to make the corvette a more able ship, and they did their job well (convoy duty/anti-submarine warfare) but when it came down to it, a world power had aircraft carriers, offensive submarines, battleships, and cruisers. Britain had these, the Soviets had some, the US had some, and yes, even the Imperial French had a few left (much of their fleet was scuttled by sailors mutinying against the collaborators) This was a major failing in regards to being a world power.
3. The Canadian Army was exactly that; an army. They had a six divisions. Problem was they didn't have the manpower to keep their land forces in that formation. There just wasn't enough of us. Units went undermanned and eventually the RCA became the dumping ground for all variety of soldiers who would have gone unassigned. This wasn't a bad thing. It was just that there was more Poles than units. There was more Norweigans than units etc, so they all ended up in Canadian formations to keep them afloat. Again, by no means a negative comment on our boys efforts. We just couldn't manage the artificial trappings of being a world power.

4. Canada had NO spies up until the Gouzencho affair in the fifties and only then was intelligence taken over by a wing of the RCMP. Our very first intelligence/security agency wasn't formed until the 1980s. We were content with the privledges extended by the US military and British intelligence agencies. Again, we just didn't make the power status.

So with all that said, do you see where I am going? Canada put a huge effort in, but it was totally unsustainable for the long term, as where France, with great latent potential and the fact they were right next door could pull it off. Besides, our government was totally ready to disengage at the end of the war. They were ready to just bring everyone home and they tried. Like a good ally Canada set up bases in Germany, right in the midst of the British zone like the good kids we are, and continued to make a contribution. Thing was, it was done at a sustainable level that met with our political will at the time.

Answer 3

Perhaps because France having been occupied by Germany had lost the most. Having their banks and museums raided by the Nazis not to mention the loss of life and personal property maybe people thought it was their due.
I realize they were not the only country under occupation but a good share of the fighting was done on French soil and maybe this was part of the reparation package.

Answer 4

Canada was considered a part of the U.K. empire. Plus weak kneed France being right next to Germany needed the zone probably more than anybody else. Just goes to show what happens when your absolutely unable to defend yourself!

Answer 5

if i am not mistaken, countries like australia and canada were still part of the british empire and were not fully sovereign. thus they were not given an occupation zone because they would still be unable to govern that zone fully. france on the other hand had the chance to have an occupation zone because they were perhaps nearer germany, perhaps they wanted some german soil to occupy for revengeful reasons for having lost to the germans and thirdly perhaps to occupy the land that they had lost to germany in previous wars and battles.

Answer 6

The same should be applicable for India, but FDR, Churchill and Stalin thought otherwise. Donot forget the part played by the French resistance. They contributed a lot to the success of D Day.

Answer 7

bypass back slightly in historic past to the The French and Indian conflict..The Colonies had the prospect to interrupt loose at that factor from English rule, by the way ,,we do talk English,,properly for the main section right here interior the US,,

Answer 8

Maybe because Canada is just a suburb of France. (just kidding, Canada...).

Answer 9

Canada was still considered a colony of Brittan I guess.