“We are leaving Dunkirk; we are not leaving the War. Or even France.”
Churchill didn’t say it, but he might have done.
At UnHerd we don’t chase the news, so I confess that I’ve yet to see Christopher Nolan’s variously acclaimed Dunkirk. But with so much in print and online, I feel that I’ve seen it already. Besides, in the 13th/18th Royal Hussars we all knew the story of Major John Cordy-Simpson, the father of our commanding officer, who had lined up his squadron after the Luftwaffe had bombed and strafed the beach, and got them to pick up the litter – “area cleaning.”
It seemed to sum it all up.
My local Odeon says the film is “the true story of the evacuation from Dunkirk in 1940”, which Nolan himself has never actually claimed. The story – the whole story – could scarcely be told in a couple of hours. But the historian Andrew Roberts (who will soon be writing for UnHerd), says that “for all the clichéd characterization, almost total lack of dialogue, complete lack of historical context (not even a cameo role for Winston Churchill)… Dunkirk somehow works well.”1
But nature abhors a vacuum of historical context. The French have complained that it didn’t show Frenchman defending the perimeter. The Indians that it didn’t show their two companies of muleteers on the beaches. And the Americans that “the fact that there are only a couple of women and no lead actors of color may rub some the wrong way.”2
It may. But what ought to rub people the wrong way is any suggestion that we were shamefully abandoning the French, that we even refused to evacuate French troops from the beaches. This is Roberts’s one substantive criticism of the film: “There was no discrimination whatsoever, and to suggest there was injects false nationalist tension into what was in truth a model of good inter-Allied cooperation. Only much later, when the Nazi-installed Vichy government in France needed to create an Anglophobic myth of betrayal at Dunkirk, did such lies emerge. It is a shame that Nolan is now propagating them – especially since this might be the only contact that millions of people will ever have with the Dunkirk story for years, perhaps even a generation. At a time when schools simply do not teach the histories of anything so patriotism-inducing as Dunkirk, it was incumbent on Nolan to get this right.”
In fact, between 29 May and 4 June when the evacuation, ‘Operation Dynamo’, was halted, 112,000 non-British Allied troops, predominantly French, were taken off at Dunkirk (in a 1:2 ratio with British troops).3
The fighting continued on other beaches
But the commitment to the French didn’t stop with the last destroyer and little ship sailing for Dover. Fighting continued elsewhere. The Saar Force, consisting of the famous 51st Highland Division, and reinforcements, was on the Maginot Line, and 1st Armoured Division, newly arrived in France, was south of the Somme. The surprise German thrust through the Ardennes, cutting off the BEF’s three army corps which had raced into neutral Belgium when the Germans invaded (a depressingly familiar re-run of August 1914), severed Lord Gort’s lines of communications to Le Havre, and with his troops in France. London at once sought to build a second BEF south of the Somme, sending troops into France through Cherbourg – including some of those taken off from Dunkirk – under Lieutenant-General Sir Alan Brooke, who had himself been taken off the beaches on 30 May.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe