France on Trial: the Case of Marshal Petain by Julian Jackson
[NC]: Penguin Books, 2024 (first published 2023) ISBN 9780141993096
This is a magnificent book. Lucid, well-written and informative, this blow-by-blow account of the trial of Philippe Petain is also an in-depth look at the pain that armistice, collaboration and Vichy caused the body politic of France from 1940-1944.
Petain's trial, which occurred in the period between VE day and VJ day in 1945, was for treason but the specific charges were rather convoluted. The prosecution tried to suggest that Petain was part of a pre-war conspiracy, which was fairly conclusively disproved. However, the trial struggled with the question of whether Vichy France was the legitimate government of France, and what part of Petain's actions constituted the treason with which he was charged - was it treason to sign the Armistice? was it treason to not move to Africa and continue the struggle from there? Was it treason to encourage French in Syria to fight the Allies? Was it treason to fire on Americans in Tunisia after they landed? Various people, including De Gaulle who would have preferred the trial to have occurred with Petain in absentia, had differing views on this question.
In the end, it seems to this reader, Petain's biggest crimes came to be meeting Hitler, and the encouragement he gave to Nazi power. However, his actual complicity in these words and meetings is in some doubt. In his late eighties, the trial revealed that often it was the prime minister Laval who was really pulling the levers, leaving Petain to be a figurehead. Of course the fact is that by remaining as figurehead, Petain gave these actions a legitimacy that came from his fame in World War One, which is possibly hard for a 21st century reader to gauge.
Another surprising aspect of the case is that very little time was spent discussing the mass deportation of hundreds of thousands of French to Germany to work in factories under appalling conditions, and almost no time spent discussing the fate of the Jewish people under Petain's government. These painful facts came out much later, in the long tail of Petainism, which Jackson describes well.
And what of Petain himself? He had returned from Germany (where he was taken when the war was being lost) to face the justice of the court, but famously said practically nothing during the trial. Whether this was due to his advanced age, or whether it was a tactic by the defence, or whether it was simply that the courtroom was so hot that he found it hard to stay awake (he wasn't alone there), it is hard to say.
Of course he was found guilty by the combined jury of parliamentarians and resisters, and was sentenced to death. De Gaulle instead put him in a prison on the Ile D'Yeu, where he died and was buried. The contested history of Petain, Vichy, and the actions of the French during World War Two are still being played out to this day. Petain has been the darling of the French right, but officially his memory is a political football - widely seen as the saviour of the French in the First World War, his actions in the Second are widely seen as shameful. Jackson explains this well.
Petain famously said in 1940 that he would give his body for France. In some ways he did so in the trial as well, as he absorbed the confusion and hatred that the French had about the previous years, and took it all on his head. He allowed De Gaulle to build a narrative of the French as a nation of resisters betrayed by Petain and his clique, a narrative which allowed the French to park the painful past and move forward free of guilt (of course, as always happens, this confected story fell apart in later years). Jackson's choice of title is apt.
From my reading of Alister Horne's book The Price of Glory it's clear that Petain was haunted by the terrible loss of life at Verdun, and it seems simple (too simple?) to posit that he did what he did in 1940 to stop it happening again. France had been traumatised by the First War, and were ready for someone to tell them it wouldn't happen again - they were pleased that Petain did that. They soon realised they had done a deal with a devil, and their regret and rage needed a focus, and Petain became that focus.
The Petain that comes out in Jackson's book is a person who wanted to do the right thing by his country, but beyond the armistice he didn't know what that was. He was hijacked and hoodwinked by those such as Laval who were more than happy to collaborate with the Germans for their ideological needs and, let's face it, for power and cupidity.
The France that comes out in Jackson's book is one that is divided, confused, and self-hating. Yet to come to terms with what had happened during the War, it gave Petain a trial that was divided and confused, with many of the participants hating the fact that they were involved in it.
Jackson has weaved all these threads into a wonderfully readable history, which is illuminating and enjoyable. A deserved winner of the Duff Cooper history prize, I can highly recommend it.
No comments:
Post a Comment