The definition of fascism is complex and debated. Some argue that Franco clearly fits their definition, others point out that his regime differed from other fascist regimes in several respects. He was certainly a rabid nationalist, a Catholic of convenience, a lover of the Army, and possessed the ability to suborn different factions to his own uses (Catholics, two different strains of monarchists, fascists, business interests, and others flocked to his banner, but most did not have their interests served in the end). He was also the head of a regime that José M. Sanchez described as 'barbarous,' a description I think is apt.

I would advise caution in labeling the opposition to the Republicans as 'fascists'. The Falange was certainly fascist, but their electoral results in 1936 were very small, and they were rapidly suborned to Franco's cause early in the Civil War. The categorization of Franco as a fascist is debated as well. The terms "Nationalists" or "rebels" are used almost exclusively by Paul Preston, Antony Beevor, and Hugh Thomas. I think that those appellations more accurately reflect the makeup of the Nationalist cause. Outside of the Falange membership, few of the other Nationalist supporters could be accurately labeled as fascists.