Problems During Construction
The main period of construction took place between 1930 - 36, implementing much of the original plan. There were problems, as a sharp economic downturn required a switch from private builders to government led initiatives, and some elements of the ambitious design had to be delayed. Conversely, Germany's remilitarization of the Rhineland provided a further, and largely threatening, stimulus.
In 1936 Belgium declared itself a neutral country alongside Luxembourg and the Netherlands, effectively severing its previous allegiance with France. In theory, the Maginot Line should have been extended to cover this new border, but in practice only a few basic defences were added. Commentators have attacked this decision, but the original French plan - which involved fighting in Belgium - remained unaffected; of course, that plan is subject to an equal amount of criticism.
The Fortress Troops
With the physical infrastructure established by 1936, the main task of the next three years was to train soldiers and engineers to operate the fortifications. These 'Fortress Troops' were not simply existing military units assigned to guard duty, rather, they were an almost unparalleled mixture of skills which included engineers and technicians alongside ground troops and artillerymen. Finally, the French declaration of war in 1939 triggered a third phase, one of refinement and reinforcement.
Debate Over Costs
One element of the Maginot Line that has always divided historians is the cost. Some argue that the original design was too large, or that the construction used too much money, causing the project to be downsized. They often cite the dearth of fortifications along the Belgian border as a sign that the funding had run out. Others claim that the construction actually used less money than was allotted, and that the few billion francs was far less, perhaps even 90% less, than the cost of De Gaulle's mechanized force. In 1934 Pétain obtained another billion francs to help the project, an act which is often interpreted as an outward sign of overspending. However, this could also be interpreted as a desire to improve, and extend, the Line. Only a detailed study of government records and accounts can solve this debate.
Significance of the Line
Narratives on the Maginot Line often, and quite rightly, point out that it could easily have been called the Pétain or Painlevé Line. The former provided the initial impetus - and his reputation gave it a necessary weight - while the latter contributed a great deal to the planning and design. But it was André Maginot who provided the necessary political drive, pushing the plan through a reluctant parliament: a formidable task in any era. However, the significance and cause of the Maginot Line goes beyond individuals, for it was a physical manifestation of French fears. The aftermath of World War One had left France desperate to guarantee the safety of its borders from a strongly perceived German threat, while at the same time avoiding, perhaps even ignoring, the possibility of another conflict. Fortifications allowed fewer men to hold larger areas for longer, with a lower loss of life, and the French people jumped at the chance.
Next page > Form and Content > Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
For Citation And Footnotes
Title: The Maginot Line
Author: Robert Wilde
Date: 2001
|
|
