The Maginot Line - French Line of Fortification

Introduction 

The Maginot Line was a line of fortification meant to strengthen the defense mechanisms of the French army. The fortification occurred in the period between the first and the second world wars. The purpose of the line was to create a barrier between France and German in anticipation of any attacks by the Germany army. The Maginot Line derives its name from the founder of the idea Andre Maginot who was the head of the Ministry of Defense in France at that time. The construction joined the stretch of land extending from La Ferte to the Rhine River. In addition to this, the French also created a stretch that extended into the Italian border. This particular stretch was to prevent surprise attacks from the Italian side. This research paper will explore the events leading to the Maginot line and its purpose, the process of building line, its significance and the failure of the French fortification.

Methodology 

The paper will apply historical methods of research to explore the background and the history of the Maginot Line during the time between 1919 and 1939. In relation to application of historical methodology, secondary data sources will remain the main materials for data collection. The justification behind this is that the research will lay into focus information about the events of the 20 th century, which are contained in the historical books. The synthesis of data will allow better understanding of the topic at hand bring into perspective the issues surrounding the Maginot line. The research will lay discuss the purpose of the Maginot Line through analysis of the pre-existing documentation regarding the French history after World War I, but before World War II. The paper will also put across the significance of the French fortification and events that followed the formation of the Maginot Line.

The Purpose of Maginot Line 

The First World War crippled the defenses of many countries. France was among the culprits of the damages of the war and the aftermath of the warfare met the country with many deficits. The war had had severely crushed French economy and the government could barely support its citizenry. About one million citizens from France died following the war while close to five million individuals had sustained trauma. Majority of the land was still under siege by the enemies, which made the situation even worse. At the end of the war in November 11, 1918 such effects prompted France to act swiftly to restore the country into order as well as to counter any further enemy attacks into the territory.

The government and the military had to formulate a successful way of regaining the dignity of the state. An addition to the insinuation that France had received was the Versailles Treaty. This treaty was an agreement made by the winning party of the world war to allow the powerful nations to continue suppressing the defense mechanisms of the defeated countries. Such was to prevent reemergence of their military prowess. As much as the aim of this treaty was to curb recurrence of war, political powers in France felt that this agreement was too harsh on them. To be specific, Field Marshal Foch saw it as a way that German had devised to get away with the looming revenge from her enemies. Following this, the politicians and the army generals in France consulted on the way forward concerning the defense of their country (Kaufmann J. E. & Kaufmann H.M., 2007) . 

Events Leading to Maginot Line Creation 

After the provocation that French had received from their enemies, the top government officials led by Prime Minister Clemenceau and Marshal Petain, the leader of the army called for meetings with various teams. The agenda of these meetings were to deliberate on the matters of security and the ways to fortify the French military defense. From the discussions, three schools of thought emerged. The first idea proposed by Charles de Gaulle was to create an attach mechanism from the French army rather than that of defense. Charles argued that confronting the German enemy front line through better and faster techniques would work to destroy German army. In this proposal, the French were to fight using mobile and means, both on land and on air. This idea received little support since most commissioners believed that such an approach would provoke the Germans to react in proportion, which would lead to conquest of the French army (Kaufmann J. E. & Kaufmann H.M., 2007).

The second proposal was that France had better chances of winning a war if they laid down certain strategic areas as their major defensive points. Strengthening of these areas were to occur from inland fighting machinery in anticipation of any attack. The major strategy of this approach to war was that it could offer the French time to unleash a counter-attack from these fortified military bases. Many of the member of the military supported this idea among them being Marshall Joffre. However, this was not good enough and it prompted the development of a third scheme.

Marshal Petain supported the view that the best way to counter the Germans was by creating a series of fortifications along the France-Germany border. These fortifications were to allow be rooted deep in the France territory along the whole stretch of the border. The purpose of this was to allow the military to back each other in case of attacks on any part of the border. This idea gained a strong political support and the government agreed to allow Marshal Petain together with Andre Maginot to execute the plan. Experience and prior military success in the World War I were the key contributors to the persuasion that Petain gave to the politicians. Backed by the success story of the Verdun fortification of the Great War, there was no doubt that Petain’s proposition was going to work, if well accomplished (Kaufmann J. E. & Kaufmann H.M., 2007).

The Process of Building the Line 

Andre Maginot was determined to see the completion of the work of building the fortification when he served as the Military Minister from 1922 to 1924. He, however, did not oversee the whole project and Paul Painleve took the project. Maginot continued to offer support to the project through mobilization of funds from the government via the Committee of Frontier Defense (CDF). The project-estimated cost was about three billion francs, which the government provided. In its initial development, the main step forward was the creation of an experimental plan that composed of three divisions. The full accomplishment of the project according to the Petain Model was through three distinct phases. The large budgetary allocation stirred great opposition from the political parties but Maginot managed to marshal up their support (Kaufmann J. E. & Kaufmann H.M., 2007).

The construction of main structures occurred in the period between in the period between 1930 and 1940, extending on the stretch from Switzerland and Luxembourg. The composition of this fortification was complex, with military reserves extending as long as 15 miles into the France mainland. Materials used to construct the defense line targeted against enemy tanks and military personnel. Guard techniques included blockhouses, metallic blocks laid to prevent entry of tanks and thick barbed wire for protection against the soldiers. Anti-tank guns stayed elevated at the top of assemblies, manned by a crew of about 30 men. The second line of guard composed of "petits ouvrages” to offer support to the first line, made up of the infantry casemates, with about 1000 men for each unit.

There also existed a network of tunnels and railway lines to connect military residents, which had the organization of a city. These cities made up of 500 men, had power generation plants, military equipment, food supplies and work plants. The railway system offered supplies to the various divisions whenever requirements needed replenishment. For observation of enemies, there were 17 posts erected on hilltops, which had a telephone communication network. A design that allowed flooding of rivers enabled the militants to keep approaching enemies at bay. In total, the front line composed of 5000 warehouses, 352 casemates and 142 ouvrages. The establishment of this physical infrastructure called for proper technical knowhow. Technicians, engineers and military personnel all received training in order to enhance effectiveness and competency. This allowed for reinforcement of the military troops and the development of professionals to deal with emergencies in case of technical itches (Kaufmann J. E. & Kaufmann H.M., 2007) . 

A major drawback to the construction process was the declaration of neutrality by Belgium and Switzerland. This meant shortfall in the support that France received from these two countries. The plan to attack from Belgium, however, remain unaffected by the change of alliances. Funding the project was also expensive which prompted the use of government initiatives to complete it. Military occupation of the Rhine River also put France in a compromising financial position. The technicalities involved in the project also limited the execution of complex designs from the initial model (Kaufmann J. E. & Kaufmann H.M., 2007).

Significance of the Line 

The line covered the border between France and Germany, as well as the Franco-Italian boundary. The original design did not include coverage of the Ardennes Forest. This was so since the designers had considered the forest impenetrable. France and Belgium had been allies and thus considered not to extend the fortification across their shared boundary. The southeastern border was to host the most number of the army so that any attack could allow them to move to the northeastern end to launch their attack in Belgium.

The line was supposed to work in various ways. First, it would prevent the invasion of the French territory by acting as a barrier against the Germans. Such a delay in direct combat would give the French a grace period in which they could reorganize themselves and launch a counter-attack. The line thousands of military personnel whose work was to guard the border and invade any enemy that would approach close to the line. In its design, the line also offered a possibility of attacking the enemy from behind in case they penetrated any part of the defense. The line would also limit invasion into the France mainland so that it could keep the battle only at the border. Through this, damages and casualties from the inner territory would be limited (Kaufmann J. E. & Kaufmann H.M., 2007).

Failure of the French Fortification 

Despite having a great structure separating them and the enemies, the Germans conquered the French in a war that followed completion of the Maginot line. Small armies attacked through the line while large troops fought in Belgium. The major success by the Germans was through the division of their attack groups into groups A, B and C, which attacked from different directions thus weakening the opposition. The main advantage of use three groups was that they confused the French army, which only concentrated on guarding through the Maginot line but penetrated through Ardennes Forest, which had minimal air surveillance from the French. The Germans managed to get through the forest by use cultivating roads and use of tankers.

The conquest of the France was possible due to the immobility of the Maginot Line. Furthermore, it was not a continuous barrier like the Great Wall of China but was composed of separate buildings across the border. This design rendered the line susceptible to conquest. The fighting troops could not relocate the structures used to construct the line other areas of weakness. This made it easy for the Germans to crush the French defense from other surrounding weak points, by evading the line. The immobility of the line allowed about one million militant persons and over 1000 tanks from German to cross the Ardennes Forest. After penetrance, the Germans attacked the line from within, leading to capture of a great number of the ouvtages. The assumption that no enemy army could penetrate the Ardennes Forest was the biggest military blunder (Kaufmann J. E. & Kaufmann H.M., 2007).

Conclusion 

In summation, both Andre Maginot and Marshall Petain both contributed in the project of the Maginot Line. While Petain oversaw its actual building, Maginot influenced the political powers at that time to consider its funding. The project drained many resources from the France economy. The perspective of this construction encouraged the defensive approach to war, thus leading to a slowdown in invention of weapons and items of war. Many other nations also started to apply the defensive approach to war. In view of this, the project harbored both an economic and a political significance. The line was a physical exhibition of the fears that the French had towards their enemies especially Germany. It was a show of the desperation that the country had within itself and the need to protect the French population. In a way, this helped in limiting the number of casualties in the subsequent wars. The reasons for failure of the line are still debatable to date.

Reference 

Kaufmann J. E. & Kaufmann H.M. (2007 ). Fortress France: The Maginot Line and French Defenses in World War II. New York, NY. Stack pole Books