More of this Feature • 1: Introduction • 2: Context & Origin • 3: Creation & Purpose 1 • 4: Creation & Purpose 2 • 5: Form & Content • 6: Defeat & Beyond • 8: Links to Photos/Maps

"Time treats few things more cruelly than the futuristic fantasies of past generations, particularly when they are actually realised in concrete and steel. Hindsight makes it abundantly clear that the Maginot Line was a foolish misdirection of energy when it was conceived, a dangerous distraction of time and money when it was built, and a pitiful irrelevance when the German invasion did come in 1940. Most glaringly, it concentrated on the Rhineland and left France's 400-kilometer border with Belgium unfortified." (Ousby, Occupation: The Ordeal of France, Pimlico, 1997, p. 14)

Debate Still Exists Over Blame
Opposing arguments usually reinterpret this last point, claiming that the Line itself was wholly successful: it was either another part of the plan (for instance, fighting in Belgium), or its execution that failed. For many, this is too fine a distinction, and a tacit omission that the real fortifications differed too much from the original ideals, making them a failure in practice. Indeed, the Maginot Line was, and continues to be, portrayed in many different ways. Was it intended to be an utterly impenetrable barrier, or did people just begin to think that? Was the Line's purpose to direct an attacking army round through Belgium, or was the length just a terrible mistake? And if it was meant to guide an army, did somebody forget? Equally, was the security of the Line itself flawed and never fully completed? There is little chance of any agreement, but what is certain is that the Line never faced a direct attack, and it was too short to be anything other than a diversion.

Conclusion
Discussions of the Maginot Line have to cover more than just the defences, because the project had other ramifications. It was costly and time-consuming, requiring billions of francs and a mass of raw materials; however, this expenditure was reinvested into the French economy, perhaps contributing as much as it removed. Equally, military spending and planning was focused around the Line, encouraging a defensive attitude that slowed the development of new weapons and tactics. Had the rest of Europe followed suite the Maginot Line may have been vindicated, but countries like Germany followed very different paths, investing in tanks and planes. Commentators claim that this 'Maginot mentality' spread across the French nation as a whole, encouraging defensive, non-progressive thinking in government and elsewhere. Diplomacy also suffered - how can you ally with other nations if all you are planning to do is resist your own invasion? Ultimately, the Maginot Line probably did more to harm France than it ever did to aid it.

Next page > Links to Photographs, Maps and Diagrams > Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

For Citation And Footnotes
Title: The Maginot Line
Author: Robert Wilde
Date: 2001