Why did France not Resist the German Remilitarisation of the Rhineland in 1936?

The German remilitarisation of the Rhineland in 1936 was a blatant violation of the Treaty of Versailles. Yet, despite the potential threat this posed, France, a guarantor of the treaty, chose not to resist militarily. This essay will argue that a confluence of factors, including military weakness, economic constraints, political considerations, and a shift in strategic thinking, contributed to France’s inaction.

Military Weakness and Economic Constraints

France’s decision to not intervene was heavily influenced by its perceived military inferiority and a crippling financial crisis. French military intelligence estimated that Germany possessed nearly 300,000 troops on the western front, a force far larger than what France could readily mobilize. (Parker, R. A. C. "The Second World War." Oxford University Press, 2001) This assessment bred a deep sense of unpreparedness within the French military leadership, who feared provoking a major conflict they were ill-equipped to win.

Furthermore, France was grappling with a severe financial crisis that made the prospect of a full-scale military mobilization economically unfeasible. The costs associated with mobilizing troops, deploying equipment, and sustaining a war effort were deemed too high, especially given the lack of guarantee of British support, which is discussed further below.

Political Considerations and Public Opinion

Domestic political considerations also played a significant role in shaping France’s response. With a general election looming in April 1936, any military action, particularly an unpopular war, was seen as politically damaging. The shadow of the First World War, with its devastating human cost, loomed large over French society, fostering a strong aversion to war among the populace.

This general anti-war sentiment made it politically risky for any government to endorse military action. The government, wary of electoral consequences, was hesitant to pursue a course of action that lacked clear public support and could potentially lead to political upheaval.

The Role of Great Britain and the League of Nations

France's decision cannot be understood in isolation from the stance of Great Britain. As a fellow guarantor of the Treaty of Versailles, Britain's support was crucial for any effective opposition to Germany’s actions. However, the British government, guided by a policy of appeasement and facing its own domestic pressures, was unwilling to commit to military action.

The League of Nations, already weakened by its failure to prevent Japanese aggression in Manchuria, proved equally ineffectual. Its condemnation of the remilitarisation was toothless and had no impact on Hitler’s calculations. This further reinforced the French perception that they were isolated diplomatically and could not rely on international support to deter Germany.

Shifting Strategic Thinking

Beyond immediate practical considerations, France’s inaction also reflected a deeper shift in strategic thinking. The devastating experience of World War I had instilled in the French a deep-seated aversion to offensive warfare. Their defensive strategy, epitomized by the Maginot Line, was based on the belief that a heavily fortified border would deter German aggression. This defensive mindset, however, left them ill-prepared to respond decisively to Hitler’s bold gamble.

Moreover, as French historian Marc Bloch noted, the remilitarisation was not merely a territorial violation but a symbolic blow against the already crumbling Treaty of Versailles. (Bloch, Marc. "Strange Defeat: A Statement of Evidence Written in 1940." Oxford University Press, 1949). The lack of international response to previous violations, such as Germany's rearmament, had already undermined the treaty's legitimacy. In this context, the Rhineland seemed less like a vital strategic asset and more like a sacrificial pawn in a much larger game.

Conclusion

In conclusion, France's decision not to resist the remilitarisation of the Rhineland was the outcome of a complex interplay of factors. Military weakness, economic constraints, political considerations, Britain's unwillingness to act, and a shift in strategic thinking all contributed to this fateful decision. While understandable given the circumstances, France's inaction emboldened Hitler, further destabilized the European order, and ultimately paved the way for the Second World War.