Would the French Army have been able to cross the Rhine in Spring 1940 if the politicians had wished?

Question

In the Phoney War of 1939 - 1940, the French army, disastrously, defended behind the Maginot LIne after token advances in the Saarland in September 1939.

If the French politicans and top commanders had wished to attack in Spring 1940, before Hitler did in May, to get far they would have had to cross the Rhine. Was this possible with their resources and military skills?

The Rhine was the front line in the South, between Strasbourg and Basle. The German side is forest. An attack further North would entail crossing the industrial Saarland or the Ardennes Hills, which would lead up to the Rhine Gorge or to the industrial area of the Rhineland around Cologne and the Ruhr. Finally, an attack in the North would go through Belgium and Holland, with accompanying political problems as well as creating additional military enemies.

The allied Rhine crossings in 1945 used methods not available in 1940.

I'm interested in what was technically possible, not what should have been done.

Answer 1

the french couldn't cross the street by themselves, in 1940, or 2007, without someones help.

Answer 2

Yes. If the French and British had struck first they could have defeated the Nazi's in 1939/40. Even in 1940 the French Army was more powerful on paper than the German one, they were simply out manoevered by the German advance through the Ardennes and the fact that Belgium's attempts to remain neutral meant that the Allies couldn't take up effective defensive positions against the Germans until it was too late. I guess they would have had to seize the Rhine bridges though, because the French Tanks were pretty substantial pieces of kit - in many respects far superior the the German tanks they faced.

P.S. Nice to see a sensible question on Y/A. What are the chances of getting only sensible answers?

Answer 3

Anything was possible , however they would not have been able to go through Holland since at the time Holland declared itself NEUTRAL.
Waiting until spring `40 also would have stupid - the right time to invade would have been September `39 after the declaration of war since Germany was just that little bit busy in Poland.
The French technically were superior in many ways to the Germans - their MBT the Char 1B was a far superior tank than anything Hitler had except in one way - communication was still by flags (white lol) ,the Maginot Line should have stopped the Germans in `40 if the dirty Boche hadn`t cheated and gone around it LOL.
As soldiers however the French were sadly lacking in decent organisation and equipment - much of which was WW1 vintage ,their leadership was old guard and stuck in the mentality of trench-warfare,their tanks while excellent were not deployed to best advantage.
So no I seriously doubt that any attempt to cross the rhine would have succeeded at that stage of the war.

Answer 4

France actually had superior equipment to the German Army at the beginning of the war. The French SOMUA tank is regarded as the best tank at the wars outset. The problem is more of doctrine and training. The divisions assigned defense of the Maginot Line did not train in maneuver warefare and did not have armor assets assigned to them. I would also guess that these garrison units did not have engineer assets subordinated to support such an advance.

Germany also made limited attacks against the Maginot Line to tie down the defenders and as a diversionary tactic to hide the Ardennes crossing.

Answer 5

No. The first major problem was the use of tanks and armoured vehicles. At this time the Germans had formed their smaller number and smaller tanks into panzer divisions whereas the allies (Britain and France) primarially used their tanks spread across the front as infantry support weapons rather than armoured spearheads. The second problem was the French training and moral at this time the French Army was primarily conscripted and poorly trained, compared to the smaller highly trained German Army. The English expeditionary force (that fought in France 1940) were better trained and more professional but still lacked the training and capability in heavy and armoured warfair as the Germans did at this time. The English and French also had no parachute divisions or training at this time which was pivital in the taking of Belgium forts by German troups in the first hours of the battle, whereas any Allied assault on German forts would have to either destroy or bypasss these strong points causing further delay and problems with supply. The German airforce over France created a quick measure of air superiority over French aircraft who were incapable compared to their Germany attackers. The only time during the battle of France air superiority was contested was over Dunkirk by the British Air Force during the evacuation. Any attack into Germany would have been primarily supported by French Air Forces.

Answer 6

The Luftwaffe's planes and pilots were far superior to the French and would have used French ground forces for target practise after destroying the French air force.
The concept of a French military victory is always a theoretical possibility, but never likely in the real world.

Answer 7

Certainly the french have been on both sides in every conflict they have been involved in,,thats why De Gaulle was in England during the war while Churchill was sinking the French fleet off North Africa

Answer 8

Technically it was possible, even with the potential political issues of the northern route. The challenge is such a move's utility. If you can't defend (as you point out at the beginning of your question), you sure aren't going to be able to attack - this is at least true pre-1945.

Answer 9

If the French had crossed the Rhine that would have been of great assistance to the British because the only reason they would cross is to surrender thus tying up whole divisions of German troops to guard and take care of them.

Answer 10

The French could not have achieved such military objectives simply because the Germans were superior in armoury having had twenty years to secretly build formidable aggressive weapons of attack. Also the French were divided within their own Government resulting in treacherous affiliations with the Nazis.
Anyone old enough to remember would reitterate my opinion.

Answer 11

Hitler was not still ready for munitions, tanks, but we were traumatized. The french commander was completeley outdated; only some young officers like De Gaulle understood the situation.
French soldiers were not cowards (some very hard fights took place), but the moronic strategy condamned them