How the French viewed Germany in 1940

8 488 39
How the French viewed Germany in 1940
"The Phony War," French soldiers play cards and ask their generals when Germany will come crawling to sue for peace...


In search of various literature that sheds light on the dark and mysterious pages stories During the Second World War, I came across a truly amazing book on the website of the Bibliothèque nationale de France: “L'Allemagne face à la guerre totale” or “Germany facing total war”, published in 1940.



According to the publisher's note, the book was completed on March 8, 1940, at the height of the "phony war," a month before the start of the operation against Denmark and Norway and a little less than four months before the Armistice at Compiègne, signed on June 22, 1940. It assessed whether Germany could withstand a total war. The conclusion was no, but not directly and definitively, rather hinted at.

A general with great merits


It must be said that this is not a pulp novel at all, although the book is written in a simple and, at times, lively style. It was written by Lieutenant General Bernard Sérigny, who was retired and in the reserves at the time.


Formal portrait of Bernard Serigny

Serigny began his military career in 1890, enrolling in the Saint-Cyr Military School, where he graduated among the top students. After serving for a short time, he also graduated from the Ecole Militaire, also among the top students. But his service did not take off until the outbreak of World War I.

At the beginning of the war, fortune smiled on him, and he became an aide to then-Colonel and later Marshal Philippe Pétain, with whom he spent nearly 30 years, until the end of August 1944, when the Germans deported the head of the Vichy government to the town of Sigmaringen, Baden-Wüttemberg. General Sérigny later testified as a witness at Pétain's trial in August 1945, but several years later, after the marshal's death in prison, he participated in the founding of the Association for the Defence of the Memory of Marshal Pétain.

But that was later. During World War I, Sérigny was Pétain's closest aide in his daily affairs and the planning of a number of operations, particularly the Battle of Verdun. At the end of the war, Pétain released Sérigny to distinguish himself. In September 1917, Colonel Sérigny was Chief of Staff of the Army Group in Italy, then commander of the 77th Infantry Division. In April 1918, with the rank of Brigadier General, Sérigny was Chief of Staff of the Central Army Group, then deputy commander of the 33rd Corps, and then again commander of the 77th Infantry Division until the end of the war.

Soon after the end of the war, Sérigny was promoted to major general and became deputy chief of the General Staff. In 1927, he became a lieutenant general, and in 1929, he became secretary general of the Supreme Council of National Defense of France. Before retiring, he was commander of the 14th Military Region in Lyon. He was a Knight of the Grand Cross of the Legion of Honor, the Croix de Guerre of France, the Croix de Guerre of Belgium, and received numerous other awards, including the Order of St. Anne, 2nd Class.

This meant he wasn't just anyone, but a general with considerable combat, military, and military-administrative experience. Therefore, his word carried particular weight.

Mad Hitler


Thus, General Serigny was presenting the position not only of the high military command and the top national security administrators, but also of the heroes of the great war.


The French army's training exercises took place just as the book was being published.

The reasons that prompted him to take up the pen are quite obvious. The book mentions September 1, 1939, and the war with Poland, meaning it was written in the fall and winter of 1939 and went to press in early 1940. A new war with Germany had begun, and French soldiers were holed up in the pillboxes of the Maginot Line and in the trenches. The public wanted to know what would happen next and how long it would last.

This is what General Serigny explained...

The main part of his book is called "The Weaknesses of German Military Power," and in it he develops the idea that Germany is weak and will not last long, especially because of Hitler's madness. General Serigny wrote about the unfinished autobahn network in Germany (it was indeed never completed and connected into a complete network) and inserted the following passage:

Today, it seems like a fly buzzing in all directions, hopping haphazardly from flower to flower. Hitler, however, is plotting something ever more grandiose; every day he issues orders that countermand the previous ones, and which, moreover, his subordinates obey slavishly. He always begins, but never finishes. Isn't this, above all, a sign of madness?

He described how German railways were overloaded, clearly under-maintained and under-repaired, and that there was a severe shortage of carriages and serviceable locomotives. General Serigny particularly emphasized the abuse of railways to organize mass transportation of people for various party festivals, parades, and other similar events. In 1937, 19462 separate trains were formed specifically for these purposes.


The NSDAP rally in Nuremberg in 1937. If we try to convert the capacity of a third-class C4ü-38 seated carriage—72 seats—just to transport the crowd in the photo, approximately 1500 people, we would need about 20 carriages.

And the conclusion:

In fact, the Nazi government, striving to produce military equipment at an alarming rate and facing a shortage of raw materials and labor, made the foolish decision to abandon one of its most important war machines. It would soon feel the consequences.

Interestingly, General Serigny had been involved in military affairs even before the First World War and was considered an expert in the field. For some reason, he didn't see these massive shipments as a sign of Germany's railways being mobilized to transport troops.

Well, that is to say, Hitler was a madman, and the Nazis were stupid... And all of this was published just over three months before German troops entered Paris on June 14, 1940.

What did the French hope for?


Of course, France and Great Britain had some sort of plan for combating Germany, which, broadly speaking, consisted of strangling Germany with a blockade. General Serigny wrote unequivocally that 34 types of raw materials were needed for the war, 23 of which were completely unavailable in Germany, and only four were fully met. You get the idea... and so on.

Particular emphasis was placed on oil and iron ore.

General Serigny estimated Germany's iron ore reserves, with all possible adjustments, at the end of 1939 at 31 million tons, that is, approximately enough for 8-9 months of military consumption.

And here's an interesting point. At that time, the French leadership, as General Serigny put it, seriously hoped that Sweden would stop selling ore to Germany. This was formulated somewhat vaguely, saying that there was intense competition for Swedish resources. Apparently, the French and British leadership hoped that by buying up Swedish ore, they would cut off supplies to Germany, as maritime transport in the North Sea, from Narvik to the Rhine ports, was blocked by the British. fleet, and then the Germans will have to ask for peace in a few months...
General Serigny wrote that Germany could still try to purchase iron ore from the USSR or even buy it from the USA and transport it in transit through Soviet territory, but this was unlikely.

Regarding oil, General Serigny calculated that Germany's military needs amounted to approximately 12 million tons per year, while its reserves amounted to 2 million tons, its own production amounted to 0,7 million tons, production in occupied Poland amounted to 0,13 million tons, and the production of synthetic products amounted to 1,5 million tons. Total: 4,3 million tons, plus a possible import of 0,5–0,7 million tons from Romania, where almost all the oil fields and refining facilities belonged to Anglo-French capital. Well, you get the idea...

What is most striking is that General Serigny provided curious data on Germany’s import of certain types of raw materials (pp. 79-80):


We won't now examine the accuracy of General Serigny's figures; we'll simply examine them within the framework of his logic. Looking at petroleum products, for example, it's clear that Germany's capabilities were significantly greater than is commonly believed, especially given how rapidly imports were growing. Serigny's figures were essentially a statistical conundrum, constructed to create a certain impression. They were practically worthless without the volume of oil and petroleum product consumption in Germany at the time.

According to Dietrich Eichholz, even in 1940, at the height of the war, petroleum product consumption stood at 5,8 million tons, including 3 million tons consumed by the Wehrmacht, while supplies from various sources totaled 6,8 million tons. This was despite reduced imports. If we assume that consumption in 1938 was approximately 5 million tons, then domestic production, synthetic fuel production, and imports created a surplus of approximately 2,2 million tons, which made it possible to build up a substantial stockpile of oil and petroleum products for the war in 1938–1939, before the outbreak of war. But this became known later.

So yes, the French military leadership believed that they had Germany surrounded on all sides by a blockade, that it had almost no resources of its own, that seaborne imports via the North Sea were blocked, that Soviet Russia would not help Germany—in fact, for a year at most, and then Germany would come crawling to ask for peace.

That's why they didn't see a serious threat in the Anschluss of Austria, the partition of Czechoslovakia, or even the conquest and partition of Poland, since none of these measures would break the French blockade. Or, as General Serigny wrote:

The occupation of Austria, and then of Czechoslovakia, enabled him to stage the military demonstrations he hoped would impress the civilized world.

It's hard to believe, but the French believed it literally on the eve of their phenomenal defeat. It would be interesting to know what General Serigny thought about the Germans' entry into Paris and the signing of the Armistice at Compiègne, given his previous statements. As far as is known, he himself was not in the Forest of Compiègne, but Marshal Pétain must have shared his impressions with him.


Reality diverged somewhat from General Serigny's assumptions...
39 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    6 February 2026 04: 30
    Reality diverged somewhat from General Serigny's assumptions...
    And who would have thought...
    1. +2
      6 February 2026 06: 29
      Quote from Uncle Lee
      And who would have thought...

      So Napoleon's reality diverged from his plans...
      It seems the French trained only on African tribes. There, they achieved victories over spear-wielding warriors...
      stop I almost forgot, it was the Gauls Asterix and Obelix who defeated the Roman Empire with Julius Caesar...
      1. +3
        6 February 2026 08: 15
        Quote: ROSS 42
        It seems the French trained only on African tribes. There, they achieved victories over spear-wielding warriors...

        By African tribes, do you mean Egypt, that is, Napoleon's Middle East campaign? Of course, Africans trained Bonaparte with spears! belay Then he had a series of brilliant victories in Europe. Austerlitz alone is worth something.
        1. 0
          6 February 2026 20: 50
          They trained in Indochina. But even there they got a hearty beating.
      2. +8
        6 February 2026 10: 44
        The French had many reasons to be proud of themselves - the C35 tank, the AMX-40 tank, battleships of the Dunkerque and Richelieu types - these were very advanced and serious developments, and their history is even more impressive.
        But they were carried away by arrogance and didn't understand, didn't have time to comprehend, that everything had changed dramatically in the 30s. They believed that Germany was England's mad watchdog for the massacre of the USSR.
    2. +13
      6 February 2026 07: 36
      Thanks for the interesting article.

      The ineradicable Gallic know-it-all and contempt, the arrogance through the lips!

      However, Dmitry, in the photo of the Nuremberg party rally there are not 1500 people, but 42,000!
      1. +5
        6 February 2026 10: 44
        I also thought that 20 carriages were somehow not enough for such a crowd.
        I know how much comes out of a packed commuter train.
      2. 0
        6 February 2026 13: 58
        Quote: Mikhail Drabkin

        The ineradicable Gallic know-it-all and contempt, the arrogance through the lips!
        No, it's simply historical memory. They remembered that during the First World War, their attempted attacks had resulted in bloodshed without tangible results. That Germany hadn't been defeated on the battlefield, but its economy had collapsed. So they settled into their fortifications, waiting for the German economy to collapse again. But times had changed. And what the Germans had failed to achieve during their last offensive turned out to be a remarkable success 20 years later.
      3. 0
        8 February 2026 13: 47
        The number of people in the photo is not 42,000, but much more than 1500: for such a dense crowd, a 7x7 meter square is approximately 100 people.
    3. +2
      6 February 2026 09: 28
      Quote: Uncle Lee
      Reality diverged somewhat from General Serigny's assumptions...
      And who would have thought...

      Yes, it turned out awkward)
      1. +1
        6 February 2026 14: 54
        No prophet is a prophet in his own country... How the British considered submarines a weapon of the weak before WW1, how Soviet generals planned to attack the enemy on his own territory before WW2, how drones were not taken seriously just 5 years ago.
        1. -1
          7 February 2026 10: 21
          Where did the Soviet generals go wrong? Isn't Berlin foreign territory?
    4. +1
      6 February 2026 20: 33
      Something reminds me of the opinions of one country about another... Quite recently... In one fell swoop we killed everyone... You can't underestimate the enemy
  2. +7
    6 February 2026 07: 12
    He sounds a lot like a modern military expert, he'd be on Channel One right now. He's also a retiree... He wanted to make money with his book, but the Germans let him down.
  3. +7
    6 February 2026 07: 29
    Just like we had before the now endless SVO.
  4. +5
    6 February 2026 07: 44
    After the end of World War I, the French needed to finally crush and dismember Germany into small states, so that no trace of militaristic spirit remained there. And French leaders, in relation to Germany, needed to be guided by the words of Machiavelli: If harm must be done to a person, it must be so serious that there is no need to fear his revengeAnd Germany's revenge followed just twenty years later...
    1. +4
      6 February 2026 08: 40
      Quote: Luminman
      After the end of World War I, the French needed to finally crush and dismember Germany into small states, so that no trace of militaristic spirit remained there. And French leaders, in relation to Germany, needed to be guided by the words of Machiavelli: If harm must be done to a person, it must be so serious that there is no need to fear his revengeAnd Germany's revenge followed just twenty years later...


      This is what Foch insisted on. But the Americans resisted.
      In fact, Foch ultimately said: “This is not peace, but a truce for one generation, no more.”
    2. +2
      6 February 2026 09: 35
      This is exactly what Foch proposed.
    3. +1
      6 February 2026 10: 36
      Quote: Luminman
      The French had to, after the end of the First World War,

      The Brits settled everything, much to the Americans' surprise. French politicians, satisfied with reparations, didn't realize that they were about to be happily neighbors.
    4. +7
      6 February 2026 11: 38
      Quote: Luminman
      After the end of the First World War, the French needed to finally crush and dismember Germany into small states so that no trace of militaristic spirit would remain there.

      Yeah... and remain the only continental power in Europe. And how are the English supposed to live after that? Where are they supposed to find checks and balances for such a monster? wink
      Britain's foreign policy was best and most clearly described in the book "Yes, Minister" (and the TV series based on it). Under the guise of satire, it presented the real politics of the United Kingdom. And as recent times have shown, even the talk of the Common Market imploding from within turned out to be prophetic.
      Over the course of at least the last five centuries, Great Britain has consistently pursued the same foreign policy line - to prevent the unification of Europe. To achieve this goal we fought with the Dutch against the Spanish, with the Germans against the French, with the French and Italians against the Germans, and then with the French against the Germans and Italians.
      In other words, divide and rule. And the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, of course, does not see any reason to abandon the principle, which for several centuries has reliably served the interests of the country.

      According to Humphrey, the principle of "divide and rule" still underlies our foreign policy. We needed to "blow up" the Common Market, he explained, and to do so, we had to join it, since all attempts to destroy it from the outside had proven unsuccessful.
      Now, acting from within, we can stir up such a mess there... We've already set the Germans against the French, the French against the Italians, the Italians against the Dutch. The Foreign Ministry is over the moon. Everything is going just like the good old days.

      © Lynn Jonathan, Jay Anthony. Yes, Mr. Minister.
    5. +1
      6 February 2026 13: 54
      Quote: Luminman
      After the end of the First World War, the French needed to finally crush and dismember Germany into small states so that no trace of militaristic spirit would remain there.
      They didn't develop a dismemberment system: let me just remind you that at the end of the First World War, there wasn't a single enemy soldier on German territory, but about half of France was under German control.
      1. +1
        6 February 2026 18: 11
        Quote: bk0010
        They didn't develop a dismemberment system: let me just remind you that at the end of the First World War, there wasn't a single enemy soldier on German territory, but about half of France was under German control.

        However, the French occupied the Ruhr.
        And for the thorough dismemberment of Germany, besides the French themselves, there was a horde of hyenas around the former Reich. The Second Polish Republic alone was worth it—it wanted Silesia, Masuria, and Warmia.
      2. +1
        7 February 2026 07: 17
        Quote: bk0010
        At the end of World War I, there was not a single enemy soldier on German territory
        But in Germany, there was famine and a complete lack of raw materials for industry. In short, do with it what you will...
  5. +6
    6 February 2026 08: 47
    Regarding the unclear situation with the Swedish ore, there is a document from the SHAT archive (now merged into the Army Historical Service), volume CEC/FT, file GQG 27, document no. 12, also known as the report of the Commander-in-Chief Gamelin to the Minister of Defense Daladier from February 26, 1940, with a summary of general strategic considerations:

    c) Eastern Europe: end the ring of blockade of Germany and continue efforts to disorganize the USSR by:
    - implementation of shares in Finland and Scandinavia (iron ores)
    - carrying out actions in the Caucasus and the Black Sea with the aim of stopping any transportation of oil across the Black Sea and destroying the infrastructure of Batumi and Baku by means of bomber aircraft. This should rely on the cooperation of Turkey and, if possible, Iran.


    Jacques Belle's book "A Strange Defeat" (even though he's a patriotic man of the "if only" variety) mentions plans to equate the supply of strategic raw materials to Germany with military contraband, with all the consequences that entails.
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. +4
    6 February 2026 09: 38
    Generals are also different. Gamelin was overjoyed when he learned of the start of the war, while Vuillemin repeatedly declared that the air force would hold out for two weeks. And he wasn't wrong.
  8. +1
    6 February 2026 11: 32
    It assessed whether Germany could withstand a total war or not. The conclusion was no.
    Serigny all correctly counted.

    But Hitler didn't care about all the rules because he knew perfectly well that France/England etc. would fight they are afraid and don't want to ,despite the advantage.

    And the tables and columns of numbers displayed instead of bayonets did not frighten him.

    It is interesting that even the lightning-fast defeat of Poland did not bring Serigny to his senses, although it would seem that fighting against Poland with France in the rear is pure madness...
    1. -2
      6 February 2026 18: 05
      Why the madness? The Germans, too, remembered the lessons of the First World War and dug in along the border. The French and British tried a couple of attacks, then decided to "starve" the enemy. Even we prepared a defensive line, but it ended up deep in the rear and was deemed "unnecessary."
      1. 0
        7 February 2026 14: 12
        Quote: parma
        Why madness?

        Compare the French army with Hitler's weaklings against them..
    2. +1
      6 February 2026 18: 16
      Quote: Olgovich
      Serigny calculated everything correctly.

      But Hitler didn’t care about all the rules because he knew perfectly well that France/England and others were afraid to fight and didn’t want to, despite their advantages.

      Moreover, Hitler also knew full well that Germany could not withstand a total war. He had personally observed the progress and consequences of the previous totalkrieg and decided to take a different path.

      That's precisely why the Germans relied on a blitzkrieg. Yes, by traditional standards, it was a gamble. But there was simply no other winning strategy for the Third Reich. The strategy of attrition had already been tried and failed.
      Quote: Olgovich
      It is interesting that even the lightning-fast defeat of Poland did not bring Serigny to his senses, although it would seem that fighting against Poland with France in the rear is pure madness.

      Anything is better than fighting France with Russia in the rear. laughing
      1. 0
        7 February 2026 14: 08
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Anything is better than fighting France with Russia in the rear.

        Why? The USSR fed Germany with oil and bread, yet France still fought...
  9. +2
    6 February 2026 17: 46
    The NSDAP rally in Nuremberg in 1937. If we try to convert the capacity of a third-class C4ü-38 seated carriage—72 seats—just to transport the crowd in the photo, approximately 1500 people, we would need about 20 carriages.
    Even by rough estimates, there are not 1500 people in the photo, but at least 15000.
  10. 0
    7 February 2026 10: 16
    The author is a common demagogue. Serigny's opinion is the opinion of a private individual—a foolish and narrow-minded person.
    In reality, the opposite was true: the French objectively assessed the danger and took countermeasures, including diplomatic ones. The key problem here was England's position, which insisted on refusing to cooperate with the USSR.
    1. 0
      8 February 2026 16: 57
      And what did the British delegation do in Moscow from April to the end of August 1939? Refusing to cooperate for five months?
      1. 0
        9 February 2026 11: 05
        Quote from solar
        And what did the British delegation do in Moscow from April to the end of August 1939? Refusing to cooperate for five months?

        She conducted negotiations to put pressure on the Reich, with the goal of never achieving a concrete result. smile
        It was no coincidence that at the end of July England informed Germany that negotiations with other countries “are only a reserve means for genuine reconciliation with Germany and that these ties will fall away as soon as the only important and worthy goal is truly achieved—an agreement with Germany.”

        While still hoping to reach an agreement with Germany, the British government did not wish, as a result of negotiations with the USSR, to be drawn into any specific commitment that could tie our hands under any circumstances. Therefore, with regard to the military agreement, we should strive to limit ourselves to the most general formulations possible.
        © Meltiukhov M.I. Soviet-Polish war. Military-political confrontation 1918-1939
        Britain's position is best illustrated by the fact that the British delegation arrived for the negotiations without any written authority. The Spanish ski instructors were... laughing
        1. 0
          9 February 2026 11: 27
          She conducted negotiations to put pressure on the Reich, with the goal of never achieving a concrete result.

          And how did you find out about this?
          The British delegation arrived for the negotiations without any written authority.

          They certainly didn't have the authority to hand Poland over to the USSR. And the USSR was interested in precisely this issue. So, understandably, the negotiations were difficult. Ultimately, the USSR found someone to negotiate with. But for us, it resulted in 27 million deaths.
  11. 0
    7 February 2026 10: 17
    Quote: Alexey RA
    The strategy of attrition has already been tried in practice and proved a failure.

    So the Schlieffen Plan of 1914 was a strategy of attrition?
    1. 0
      9 February 2026 10: 53
      Quote: Explainer
      So the Schlieffen Plan of 1914 was a strategy of attrition?

      The strategy of attrition is what came out of the Schlieffen Plan in real life.
  12. -1
    7 February 2026 23: 05
    Quote: Scharnhorst
    No prophet is a prophet in his own country... how Soviet generals planned to defeat the enemy on its own territory before WW2.

    I understand, of course, that they don't teach this in the Hitler Youth, but the fascist generals also planned to fight on foreign soil, but ended up on their own...
  13. 0
    9 February 2026 12: 03
    Quote: Alexey RA
    Quote: Explainer
    So the Schlieffen Plan of 1914 was a strategy of attrition?

    The strategy of attrition is what came out of the Schlieffen Plan in real life.

    You need to rename the village of Olgino to Neznaykino - the Germans were actively trying to avoid a war of attrition - in 1914 - the offensive on Paris, in 1915 - the offensive in Poland, in 1916 - the Verdun meat grinder, in 1917 - the offensive in the south, in 1918 - the offensive on the Western Front.