Charles De Gaulle on French Canada, Quebec
From "C'était de Gaulle"
The issue of French Canada was dear to General de Gaulle. It is often thought, in France as elsewhere, that his speech in Montreal was the result of spontaneous communion with the enthusiastic crowd that had gathered that day in front of the city hall. I have tried to show here that this was not the case, but had been slowly building up. Instead, one should remember that De Gaulle was a world historical character who thought in increments of thousands of years. His first visit to Quebec had actually occurred a few weeks after the Normandy landings.
He had landed in Ottawa, which had lended its support early on to his cause, right after a trip to Washington DC where President Roosevelt had finally recognized him as the sole representative of Free France. In Quebec however, deeply attached to a historical and traditional France which had ceased in their eyes with the Revolution, the figure of Marshall Pétain was much more popular. This quiet visit to Montreal and Quebec City, where the first committee of Free France was formed outside England, had been lukewarm. But this would not be the case some decades later, when De Gaulle would return as the President of the French Republic.
This is a particularly long post, and you may miss the most crucial parts towards the end detailing his 1967 trip and its consequences on an e-mail reader. You can read it on the web if so.
I also thank our friend @SueviMan for requesting a post on this topic.
On the demographic concerns of minorities
“The important thing for a minority, you see, is to be the majority somewhere. If the ethnic French were the majority in Oran and the Mitidja Plain up to Algiers, they would control the land. No one could object, as long as they allowed the Muslim population to freely organize itself beyond the enclave where they would be grouped. The French Canadians are the majority in Quebec: there, they have been able to exist, they have been able to defend themselves. In other provinces, where they are in the minority, they are overwhelmed, flattened. The pied-noirs, and the Muslims who would want to stay with them, could hold out in this enclave. Two million Israelis have held their ground against the hundred million Arabs that surround them.”
On the Algerian question in comparison to De Gaulle’s treatment of French Canada
Elysée, Salon des Beauvais, October 5, 1961
At the end of dinner, the General delivers a breathtaking toast. He addresses Jean Lesage, Prime Minister of the province of Quebec, received with the honors protocol reserves for the heads of a sovereign state. Currently occupied with defending the idea of dividing Algeria, I am particularly moved by the warmth he shows towards these French from across the Atlantic, while the French from across the Mediterranean seem to leave him colder:
“You are Quebec! You are the French Canadians! No amount of time could erase from the heart of our people the nostalgia for those of its children it left there nearly two hundred years ago...”
When he speaks of “our people,” with which he identifies himself, the General is perhaps a bit overzealous: the French know nothing of Quebec.
“‘I remember!’ is the motto of Quebec. Seeing it in your person, France says as much to you.”
These official dinners in the Salon des Beauvais are often stiff. Tonight, one can feel the breath of history.
At coffee, Louis Joxe amiably tells me, “Don't exhaust yourself spreading your ideas about dividing Algeria. The General is not going to let himself be caught in a new trap in Algeria, when his grand thought, as you clearly heard, is to reawaken the French fact in the world, to counterbalance the Anglo-Saxons.”
[…]
Salon doré, after the Council of May 7, 1963
Less than two years after his first visit, Lesage is back. I have been summoned to a preparatory meeting that the General is to chair the day after tomorrow, but a trip to Bonn will prevent me from attending. I take the opportunity of our conversation to apologize—and to ask him what he expects from Lesage's visit.
CDG: “Ah yes, indeed, I've scheduled a restricted Council. It's a very important matter. French Canada is in full evolution and development. Sooner or later, it will separate from English Canada, because it is not in the nature of things for French Canadians to live eternally under English domination.”
“Of course, it's natural for them to form a Confederation, and for this Confederation to address the issues of their communal life. But neither of the two peoples should be dependent on the other. I do believe there will be a French Republic of Canada. On that day, the question of its relations with France will take on a particular importance.”
“Naturally, the day we hold a meeting of French-speaking peoples, French Canada would have a prime place.”
AP: “Won’t people say that you abandoned Algeria after all our other colonies, but that you are now going to reconquer Canada?”
CDG: “Let them say what they will.”
On the incompatibility between the French and English communities of Canada
Salon doré, after the Council of September 3, 1962
Couve de Murville commented at the Council on the internal tensions between the two linguistic communities in Belgium. The General tells me: “After the war, I would have only needed to say one word for Wallonia to request attachment to France and for Belgium to break apart. But precisely, that word, I did not want to say.”
Would he want to say that word for Canada? I dare not ask him. There are comparable problems of incompatibility between two peoples in Canada and Belgium. But the General does not seem to equate the two situations. Something to explore, should the opportunity arise…
[…]
Conversation during a trip in Champagne, April 24, 1963
As our railcar passes by the vineyards, I say to the General, “Here is a wine that is inimitable and yet imitated everywhere: in Crimea, Australia, California.”
CDG: "Stalin had the poor taste to toast me with Russian champagne. The Canadians, in '60, thought they would make me happy by getting me to drink Canadian champagne in Toronto. That was the last straw. I told them: ‘It takes as much courage to make champagne by the Great Lakes as it would to transport the Great Lakes to Champagne.’ They took that as a compliment. They were English Canadians.”
He continues after a moment, “In reality, English Canadians do not understand French Canadians. One might even say they do not like each other. And vice versa. For two centuries they have lived together and have practically not intermingled. They’re not going to start now, at a time when national awakenings are occurring everywhere. Sooner or later, the French will rebel against the English. At least in Quebec, since they are a minority everywhere else in Canada… If we have given self-determination to the Algerians, why wouldn't the English grant it to the French of Canada?”
He concludes: “Sooner or later, Quebec will be free.”
“Free Quebec”, the two words that will be heard around the world are already here, four years and three months in advance.
[…]
Council of March 11, 1964
Couve: “Dupuy, the Canadian ambassador to Paris, is going to retire and become the general commissioner of the World's Fair that will be held in Montreal in three years. It is a Francophone, not an Anglophone, who is put in charge of the Montreal exposition.”
CDG (animatedly): “Francophone? Anglophone? We do not have to talk like this among ourselves. There are French and English. Period.” (Enough of this hypocrisy within the Council.)
Couve: “Abroad, it would be frowned upon.”
(He acknowledges the fact of the spoken language. He wants to forget the cause of this fact: ethnic origin.)
“Dupuy will be replaced by Jules Léger, a career diplomat, the brother of the cardinal-archbishop of Montreal. He is the most distinguished element of the French Canadians.” (Couve corrects himself; but “abroad” he would say: Francophone.)
On French involvement in French Canada
Council of May 29, 1963
Couve and Messmer report on the latest session of the Atlantic Alliance in Ottawa—and both touch upon French Canada. Messmer is the more incisive of the two. For him, the relations between the French and English reflect a shocking disparity between the communities. Couve is much more reserved—and behind him, the Quai1 is frankly hostile to the General's ideas.
After his two ministers, the General returns to the subject: “I too am struck by the colonial character that French Canada retains. Particularly, it has not moved out of the colonial era economically and socially. Its industry, commerce, and banking are in the hands of the Anglo-Saxons; and increasingly, in the hands of Americans, who hold 60% with a trend towards increasing this percentage.”
“Until now, this shocked no one: it had been so for two centuries. Thus, it continued without harm. Today, a part of French Canadians, who are nevertheless educated and have high ambitions, find it shocking, and that it can no longer continue.”
“This feeling is more significant than the pseudo-terrorist demonstrations2. Simply, they resonate in the minds and hearts of both French and British Canadians.”
Messmer (as if there was no foreign minister; but are these affairs really foreign?): “Not long ago, when French Canadians thought of France, it was the France of the seventeenth century. Today, when they think of France, it is the France of General de Gaulle. This will pose some problems for us. Financial problems: they will undoubtedly ask us for investments, facilities. But above all, psychological and political problems.”
CDG: “Why not provide greater French financial aid to Quebec? Lesage asks us: ‘Why wouldn't we ensure the assembly of French cars in Quebec? Why are French firms so hesitant to invest with us?’“
Giscard: “We will face American competition! Today, the capital invested in Canada is entirely American. Our companies consider investing in Canada as equivalent to investing in the American market. Before setting foot in this market, they want to think it over. Even Renault, with all its power, does not have an assembly plant in the United States.”
Pompidou: “The role of American finance is growing. The Quebecois will only get out of it through nationalizations. It's an inevitable reflex when one is in such a situation of domination. It's an anti-colonial reflex, like the one Nasser had when nationalizing the Suez Company. Moreover, only the state can create industries. Quebec lives off its raw materials and its electricity.”
CDG: “The Quebecois are increasingly uncomfortable. They are becoming rebels. They will be increasingly tempted by explosives if Ottawa does not agree to emancipate them. For two years since they opened a General Delegation of Quebec in France, what contacts have they made?”
Giscard: “Modest achievements are underway. For example, Air Liquide is expanding. There will be a French exhibition next fall.”
CDG: “In any case, I insist that we feed the French Canadians with everything they ask to absorb. Especially in terms of radio and television broadcasts.”
At the end of the Council, the General clarifies to me: “There are no real relations between French and English Canadians. English Canadians are engineers, business leaders, administrators, financiers. French Canadians remain mostly peasants, unskilled workers, sweepers, elevator boys or even lawyers, notaries, and priests.”
Practically, he then gives me a specific instruction: “Look! For the radio, you should do something! It is absolutely necessary that our broadcasting have a permanent representative in Montreal or Quebec. He could report on what is happening among the French in America. He must flood us with information about French Canada and saturate the French of Canada with information about France. There is a great mission to be accomplished here. Try to find a cool, hip guy.”
[…]
Council of January 22, 1964
Couve gives his report on the visit to France by the Prime Minister of Canada, Pearson: “He had just visited the United States and Great Britain. It was normal for him to do the same in France, one of the two ‘mother nations.’ Yet, it was the first time.”
“Pearson is concerned about the resurgence of the movement developing in the province of Quebec. If the Canadians have made an exception this time to the Anglo-Saxon monopoly in their international relations, it is because there is now an international problem. And why did Ottawa allow Lesage to visit General de Gaulle's government twice? It's because Lesage is the best support for Prime Minister Pearson, the most capable of calming separatism by satisfying the demand for identity.”
“Friendly atmosphere, everyone with their concerns. Conclusion: the problem of French-speaking Canadians is almost officially raised.”
Pompidou: “It is in our interest to promote French investments in Canada. But American projects amount to 750 million dollars! It's not the same scale! This leads to a total financial takeover by the United States of the Canadian economy. We are not on the same level!”
CDG (as if he hadn't heard his Prime Minister): “I have the impression, not surprisingly, of a tense situation and therefore of a Canadian government that is off-balance. The Canadian fact is different from what it used to be. French Canadians did not like the English, but they accommodated into being in a submissive situation. From time to time, they put some Saint-Laurent or some Laurier at the head of the Ottawa government, it changed nothing or almost nothing, but it saved appearances.”
“The French Canadian people are moving towards independence. They dare to recognize that they have been colonized. They even feel marginalized. The call of the new France cannot fail to act on the minds. Canada is a federal country that wants to stop being so. There will be in Canada a French community and one that is not French. The entity of French Canada will increasingly manifest itself, and it will not be prevented.”
“This puts the Pearson government in an unclear situation. In Canada's relations with France, he would like us both to help him in his current balance—which has no future!—and to control the movement of the French in Canada, so that it does not take a violent turn.”
“All this is contradictory. The conversations were friendly, but inevitably awkward. We have things to do in Canada. More in French Canada than in the other. In any case, it will not be gigantic.”
“There is one gigantic, overwhelming fact: the presence of the United States. In all forms: economic, technical, financial, cultural, academic, etc.”
“Great Britain is fading, the United States tightens its grip. The current Canada, while not rejecting American investments, is deeply dissatisfied.”
“Canada, which will no longer be federal but confederal, will consult to defend the independence of the whole. All this will gradually become clearer as French Canada moves towards independence.”
[…]
At the Council of December 2, 1964, Leduc is appointed as the French ambassador to Ottawa. The General comments: “By the force of circumstances, he becomes our ambassador to Quebec, pending the day when Quebec and France will be able to exchange ambassadors. Our ambassador to Canada must adapt to this new fact. He must take charge of the evolution of Quebec and the evolution of our relations with Quebec.”
[…]
Council of March 3, 1965
Couve: “For the past six months, we have been discussing a cultural agreement with the Quebec authorities. It is now done. Thus, official relations between France and Quebec are developing. A permanent Franco-Quebecois commission will be charged with promoting them.”
CDG: “I saw Gérin-Lajoie yesterday. This ‘agreement,’ as they call it, is important in itself, for our cooperation and for the international future of Quebec. This is the first time Quebec has signed an agreement with another state. It is the reunion of a part of the French people with France.”
“Gérin-Lajoie insisted to me that we send them child care workers, kindergarten teachers, and elementary school teachers: ‘You have the best preschools in the world. In Quebec, people with higher education speak good French; but the common people are increasingly tending to speak Joual — that's how they pronounce ‘cheval’ — and they are disconnecting from international French. It is from the earliest years that good French must be taught to the Quebecois.’ He is counting on us.”
Salon doré, after the Council
AP: “Regarding the agreement with Quebec, what comment would you like me to make?”
CDG: “Say that the Council was pleased to ratify this agreement. It organizes the ties that have begun to exist between Quebec and France. We must not push too hard, the federal government in Ottawa is nervous. We will proceed step by step. Take it easy.”
“But bear this in mind: a minority can only preserve its identity over the long term if it is the majority on its own soil.”
(He had said exactly the same thing to me when he encouraged me to write about the partition of Algeria)
“The Quebecois have the miraculous fortune of being an 80% majority in the face of the English on Quebec territory. They are the ones who can impose their will on the territory. To remain themselves. To perpetuate themselves. To avoid blending in. To not get overwhelmed.”
“It's curious, what Gérin-Lajoie told me. There is a dual movement in the Quebecois people. After having multiplied by a hundred in two centuries—from sixty thousand to six million—they are experiencing a revival worthy of admiration; but at the same time, the language of the less educated Quebecois is deteriorating. If they do not re-engage with universal French, they will become creolized.”
Never, neither in public nor even with his Quebecois interlocutors, will the General make reference to this aspect of the problem: he instinctively senses how vexing it would be for the Quebecois people. To appear to be giving lessons in proper French would surely provoke a violent reaction of wounded pride, but I am sure, because he has spoken about it several times in small groups, that he is concerned about it.
“The unfortunate French Canadians who are dispersed in the other provinces are everywhere in the minority, and most often in a very small minority. In one or two generations, they will have disappeared. That's why the Quai d'Orsay is blind in wanting to play Canada rather than Quebec. The predominantly English provinces, which is to say 9 out of 10, are destined to become entirely English. The predominantly French Canada, that is Quebec, alone has a chance to remain French. It can then become a rallying point for the French dispersed across the vast Canadian territory. It will be their protective homeland.”
The General stands up and walks me out slowly.
CDG: “Only the Quebecois can emancipate themselves. In the other provinces, the French Canadians are too weak. It's the Quebecois who hold the solution in their hands. In a few years, what was just a province has become a state. Lesage and his party won the elections with the slogan: ‘Masters in our own house.’ They have taken over the charge of education from the clergy. They have established ministries, a civil service. They have secured control of hydroelectric resources. They have affirmed their French identity. They have achieved a lot in a short time. This is proof that they are carried by popular will. Therefore, they will not stop on such a good path.”
On historic French relations with French Canadians
Council of Thursday, August 29, 1963
Giscard seeks the Council's approval for French participation in the 1967 Montreal World Fair.
Giscard: “Regardless of the doubts about the usefulness of this exhibition for us—my doubt is profound—it is difficult to avoid, since it is in Montreal. Our participation is not really justified for commercial reasons, but it is inevitable for political reasons.”
Pompidou: “Before that, this fall, there will be a special exhibition that France is organizing in Montreal. The Canadians are inviting a large number of government members to attend this first exhibition. Mr. Malraux is already scheduled to go, which will lend considerable prestige to our presence. The other ministers should only accept these invitations with restraint. However, it is also not desirable that we give the impression that we wish no one to go.”
CDG: “No one has asked me to go.”
He sketched a frown that feigned disappointment. We smiled: he is invited to so many places that if he were invited to this minor exhibition, he could only decline. But Pompidou tells me as we leave: “The Canadian embassy is inviting French ministers left and right. It's to prevent de Gaulle from going. They are terrified at the idea. I understand them.”
After the Council, the General once again lets me see how historical his vision of politics is:
“We will not go to Montreal in 1967 to celebrate the centenary of the Canadian Confederation, as the English Canadians and the federal government would like. If we go, it will be to celebrate two hundred years of the French Canadians' fidelity to France.”
“It is out of the question for our participation to be included in a European presentation, like for the Seattle exhibition. We do not blend in. This is a major French affair. We must not waste time. We have participated in previous exhibitions. How could we not do so in Montreal, which is the second French city in the world?”
He has the knack for turning situations around: in his view, 1763 does not mark two hundred years of French abandonment on this side of the Atlantic, but two hundred years of French affirmation in North America. 1940 sheds light on 1763: a disaster, but immediately the start of resistance. A resistance outside the national soil. What he led from London, alone, without support, an expatriate, was collectively accomplished by the French Canadians, but they too were without support and expatriates.
September 15, 1963
On the phone, Saint-Légier warns me: the General has written in the margin of a note on the official visit to France of Lester Pearson: “French Canada will necessarily become a state, and it is in this perspective that we must act.”
On the contemporary circumstances of French Canadians
Council of October 23, 1963
Malraux returns from inaugurating the French exhibition in Montreal. He speaks with the resonant tones of grand occasions.
Malraux: "The immense enthusiasm that surrounds this French exhibition and that welcomed me is not entirely natural. There is in Canada only a single problem: Quebec autonomism. The reality of autonomism is much stronger than one might imagine from afar. It grips the entire political life. There is no concomitance between the movement towards autonomy and the ‘Social Credit’, which is a Poujadist movement born in British Columbia, quite different, that had great success, but will no more.”
"The autonomist movement is still almost exclusively academic. But the sentiments are quite general. The mindset of the French Canadians is that of a minority who wants to stop being one. Academics, students, and teachers have thrown bombs and continue to do so. Education is in the hands of the Church. Despite the power of the Church, it is sons of professors and government members, the nephews of bishops, who participate in this movement.”
"In courts, they adopt the same attitude:
We are French (which is not true);
We are autonomists;
You might as well condemn us: dead, we will be heroes.
It's quirky, violent, but limited. As for sentiment, the government of Quebec, which is anti-terrorist, has a permanent tenderness towards them; they are seldom condemned.”
“This movement is based on a few ideas:
We have been colonized, we are colonized, we no longer want to be. Independence was given to Senegal, it is not normal that independence is not given to Quebec.
Deep resentment towards the English, who despise French Canadians. The English newspapers destroy every morning what the federal government tries to undertake.
Traditionally, the French are the proletariat, the peasants, the priests, the notaries. Today, the autonomists are academics, chemists, technicians. The theoretician of autonomism, Chapuis, is a scientist."
“It's an ideology of reaction, of resentment. They don't care about concrete problems. Chapuis is inspired by Mein Kampf, but without the anti-Semitism or concentration camps. He's passionate, simplistic, dramatic. '‘We are a minority. It's not normal that we can only express ourselves in Quebec, where we are a majority. Everywhere in Canada, our rights should be recognized on par with those of the English. It's intolerable to receive speeches from General de Gaulle through English news agencies and then poorly translated into French.’”
(Laughs around the table.)
“‘French textbooks are very stupid, as they are translated from English and not adapted to our culture. All of this is unbearable.’ The anger of French Canadians has become so great that they now have the will to be something other than angry men.”
“The position of the Ottawa government is to be understanding. It sees the seriousness of this movement. It realizes that if there is secession, British Columbia will join the United States; only the Great Lakes will remain of Canada. It is therefore ready to recognize the rights of the French. It would like to go as far as possible, provided there is no separatism. It does not condemn autonomism as immoral, but as impractical.”
“The position of the Quebec government is the same as that of the federal government and the government in London. It is a government of jurists, lawyers. It never asks fundamental questions—the fate of the world—nor economic questions. It simply wants to know if the moral rights of Quebecers are recognized, and how. The autonomist movement meets with moderate sympathy from Prime Minister Lesage, and stronger in the municipalities.”
“French Canadians, they are two million dispersed men and four million recoverable men. In Quebec, it is the concentration of the proletariat. The framework of their life is no longer predominantly rural. The mayor of Montreal is fiercely autonomist and pro-French. The subjects of humiliation of French Canadians are numerous and the mayor knows the feelings of his population. English newspapers add fuel to the fire. Being linked to the French in Montreal means being linked to 'unsavory' people.”
“The English position: oppose autonomism because it is not viable. It would entail a crushing decline in the standard of living in Quebec, which would have no other resources than becoming American. Anti-Americanism can become a bond for Canadians. My discourse on culture, Prime Minister Lesage has taken it in an anti-American direction. Yet the theses I have presented are the same as in New York with Kennedy beside me.”
“Lesage's professed anti-Americanism is intended to provide common ground with the Federal: it allows him to approach the Ottawa government without being treated as a collaborator. Anti-Americanism is the mask of a rapprochement with Great Britain. Pure autonomists are not anti-American. Neither is the population. The principle of the French Canadian nation lies in a hostility that is entirely directed against English Canadians. But they are not enemies of the American way of life. What they dream of is that the skyscrapers of Montreal belong to French Canadians, or to a French Canadian state.”
(While Malraux prophesies, the General, sometimes turns towards him, to his right, as if charmed, sometimes looks straight ahead.)
“In Montreal, our exhibition is impressive. It is considered the most attractive ever seen there. It demonstrates the overwhelming superiority of French industry, at least compared to the last Soviet exhibition. Quebec needs an auto assembly plant, for Caravelles. France becoming a major industrial country is a revelation to them. The key to their enthusiasm is the obvious resurgence of France, as they feel it is in harmony with their own resurgence.”
“But they are also enthusiastic about Marie Bell. The appeal of French culture is that it justifies their difference and their identity for French Canadians. We must trust the French Canadians so that together we can do something that has French significance in the future of the world.”
“Two unknowns. The Church has not excommunicated any of these autonomist revolutionaries. Will the unions support this movement? Will they utilize the irrational element? Will they adopt a revolutionary stance, like the French unions, or will they emulate the unions in the United States? The economic structure is American.”
“The Quebec government evokes the tradition of the 1890s in France. It is fighting against an non evolved Church. It's like combism without Combes3.”
“What can we do? If we want to offer help, it should be through the training of technicians. They need more technical cadres with French inspiration. There are fields where France leads. We should bring as many students as possible to France, so that in eight to ten years, they can take charge of the country.”
“We tend to think Canada enjoys its vast spaces. This is false. Its population is concentrated in a strip along the US border. We need real specialists to study what can be done for the Far North, which should be the chosen field for our technicians. France has a significant role to play. It must not only be part of Canada's past but also a part of its future.”
The General (who listened intently throughout): “Thank you. It's as interesting as possible. French Canada must be taken as it is, that is, as a reality that wants to remain French. When Mr. Malraux talks about autonomy, we must understand independence. This independence seems inevitable in the more or less long term for three reasons:
1. A national entity that has held out for so long and that suddenly wakes up can only become free sooner or later. I do not know whether it will be in ten, twenty, or forty years, but French Canada must become independent and thus shake off, violently or not, the position of dependence in which it finds itself.
2. French Canada was colonized by the English. It is completely dominated by the Anglo-Americans. This colonization is increasingly painful and the feelings of humiliation and revolt it has aroused must find their outlet in a political movement.
3. There is an element that plays in the same direction, which is the reemergence of France, causing some tremors. France was a dormant nation. It is awakening. This also has the effect of awakening those who feel French at heart and who start looking towards it. We cannot really complain about this.”
“What attitude to adopt? We have no reason to be hostile to this development of the French Canadian nation. Certainly, we do not have to take sides, as a state, in the evolution that leads Quebec towards independence. But we have no reason to grieve over it, nor to pretend that we grieve over it, nor to contest it.”
“We must instead prepare for a foreseeable future, in the more or less long term: the independence of Quebec."
Missoffe points out that four hundred families of farmers repatriated from Algeria would like to settle in Quebec.
CDG: "There is no disadvantage to that. We should not oppose it, but help if you can."
He would be opposed to pied-noirs moving to Argentina or Chile, which would be “a loss of French substance.” But he sees only benefits in them going to strengthen the French substance of Canada.
After the Council, the General resumes for me: “This French Canadian state, given where it is and how it is, will likely need to establish an organic conjunction with non-French Canada, that is, both with English Canada and with all those virgin lands Malraux spoke about, which should somehow be a land of common colonization for both English and French Canadians. This conjunction, we are obviously not opposed to.”
“The American fact is there. It is overwhelming, all along this Canada that is finding itself. But why should this American fact lead to the disappearance of the French entity of Quebec?”
“Of course, there might be a risk of a protectorate by the United States, and also a risk of revolt against the dependence in which the Americans are always inclined to place their proteges. Therefore, if the Americans help Canada, all the more reason for us to also help them on the cultural, technical, and economic front.”
“The French Canadians are in danger in their identity. We must come to their aid. Who invented the right of peoples to self-determination? France. Yes, it is our duty to help the Québécois to self-determine.”
“What is happening in Canada only confirms the usefulness and correctness of our national policy. The more we proclaim the independence of nations, the more we become the leader of those who are tired of being dominated either by the Americans or by the Russians.”
The General realizes the enormity of everything he has just said in the Council of Ministers, and in our tête-à-tête. As if regaining his composure, he concludes:
“Naturally, not a word of all this. The time has not yet come to reveal our hand. Just embroider on that theme: satisfactory impressions; success of the French exhibition in Montreal, which was a true demonstration of Franco-Canadian friendship. Malraux was surprised by what he saw, especially the economic, cultural, and social development of Quebec. A great desire to see relations with France multiply on the cultural and economic level — which cannot displease us.”
On catholic institutions in Québec
In May 1963, as I was speaking to General Catroux about the French rector of Saint-Pierre-Port in Guernsey, who claimed to know him well, he strongly confirmed to me: “When he took office, this priest found his church and its rectory dilapidated. French-speaking parishioners had turned away from the sanctuary of Our Lady of the Rosary towards the British churches on the island. He had to borrow money to restore the buildings; but until his debts are repaid, his church cannot be consecrated. I recounted to General de Gaulle the history of this church, which had been built with the personal assistance of Charles X. I said to him: ‘The Charles of that time contributed to the construction of this church. It would be wonderful if the Charles of today contributed to its restoration.’ I was sure of his reaction.”
“The General immediately sent this priest his personal donation, which covered the cost of the pink granite altar. He said to me: ‘I am touched by the endeavor of a man who, in the same gesture, combines his Christian faith with his love for France.’ Well, that's exactly what attracts him to French Canadians. You'll see, he won't rest until he has made a striking gesture to bring us closer to them.”
On Francophonie
“Francophonie is a great idea; someday it will have to come to fruition. I probably won't live to see it4. We must not be the ones asking for it. The project must come from outside, matured by countries where French is spoken, and who will not hesitate to affirm their attachment to French culture. But if we make advances in this direction, we will be accused of neocolonialism.”
“What would be reasonable is to create a periodic and consultative assembly that revives the idea of the Community Senate, allowing delegations from the parliaments of African states to come each year, for example to Paris, to discuss common issues. Look, a bit like the Assembly of the Council of Europe: what we do in Strasbourg with sixteen other countries, why wouldn't we do it in Paris, at least once a year? It would be logical. Many desire it. But we must take into account the anti-colonial demagogy.”
“Raphaël-Leygues was very involved in this issue last year. He traveled to all the African states trying to generate this idea. He encountered much sympathy, but also some reluctance. Ultimately, almost all were ready to come, provided the Algerian War was over. Houphouët and Senghor were ready to take the initiative themselves at the end of the Algerian War. It ended, and they did not take the initiative at all. In reality, all these African statesmen are so demagogic that they are afraid to find themselves face to face with Whites. So, they will never accept to recreate a structure where they would face the French: it reminds them too much of the association of the horse and its rider. They have been told over and over that they allowed themselves to be exploited, and that if they were poor, it was because we had plundered them… They are afraid of being accused of being exploited again.”
“So, the day when Algeria calms down, when Morocco and Tunisia also join, and then Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and then Lebanon, perhaps even Syria if it stops cozying up with Nasser… And then Haiti, and then, why not, French Canada, since there is a French people in America, and who would have every reason to be part of this ensemble… Then, when these conditions are met, we can have a meeting of heads of state and government of all these countries. Then an assembly of French-speaking nations, based on the free will of all member states. It cannot have too much of a political aspect. It will be a purely consultative assembly, where French will be spoken, and where people who speak French, participate in the same culture and civilization, maintain the same language, and want to see it develop, will be happy to meet. It will be a cultural, economic, and sentimental assembly. We should not expect the elaboration of a common policy from it. However, it could be very useful. But that day has not yet come.”
[…]
September 11, 1966, on the plane over the Pacific
The General tells me: “Now that we have decolonized, our rank in the world rests on our radiative force, which is primarily our cultural power. Francophonie will one day take over from colonization; but things are not yet ripe. Quebec must be a key piece in the Francophonie. It must not let itself be stifled by Canada under the guise of supposed bilingualism, which is just a ruse to make the French speak English, while the English will not bother to learn French. And then, we will see what we can do to lend a hand to Quebec.”
AP: “Do you intend to visit the Montreal exhibition?”
CDG: “Certainly not! Quebec has become a boiling pot. If I go there, I would have to walk around Montreal and Quebec City. My visit would not go unnoticed. It might even blow the lid off the pot. I have other things to do than that. Or else, I would have to limit myself to the Exhibition. But do you imagine me crossing the Atlantic to go to the bazaar?”
[…]
During a Cabinet meeting, General De Gaulle addressed the Secretary of State for Cooperation, Jean Charbonnel: “It's not just about cooperating with Africans! There are the French Canadians! Generally speaking, what deserves our help in priority is Francophonie, which should be one of our major undertakings.”
Thus, I paid attention to Dorin, when he brought to my notice the upcoming biennial conference of French and African Education Ministers, scheduled to take place in Libreville in February 1968.
I mentioned this to the General: “We could invite Quebec to participate. It would be like giving them a leg up towards an international presence.”
CDG: “You're right! That would be important.” (It's rare for him to immediately approve an idea that isn't his own, but this one suits him very well!)
AP: “Either as a full member or at least as an observer.”
CDG: “No, not as an observer! As a full member! Explain to Johnson the importance of this invitation for Quebec, and then we will do the necessary with Gabon. Quebec needs windows onto the world. The only way for a people to exist is to step fully into the concert of nations. Quebec will exist when it participates freely in international conferences. Try to get them included in this conference of Education Ministers. It has the makings of a sovereign nation; it has cultural cohesion; it has asserted itself in four centuries of struggle against nature, against the Indians, against the English.”
He reinforces his conviction with a burst of irritation:
“The conduct of our press is scandalous. That the Anglo-Saxons reacted as they did is quite natural: they cannot bear France speaking out loud. But that French bourgeois should follow in their footsteps is proof of their rage to erase France at all costs.”
“In fact, the Ottawa government is in the hands of English Canadians. It does not truly represent the French Canadians scattered across Canada, it is the Quebec government that does, provided it strengthens and becomes sovereign.”
He draws a practical conclusion from this principle:
CDG: “We are going to change the status of the French Consulate General in Quebec. It was dependent on our embassy. Its correspondence had to go through Ottawa. It needs to communicate directly with Paris, bypassing the embassy. The climate in Ottawa is such that an ambassador will always fear displeasing the authorities to whom he is accredited. Until we have an ambassador in Quebec, our Consul General must inform us and act independently.”
He stands up to indicate that the interview is over: “From now on, there must be no France without Quebec, and no Quebec without France.”
At the doorstep of the Salon doré, he repeats to me: “And above all, do not go to Ottawa! Do not kowtow before Mister Martinne, who calls himself Monsieur Martin in Quebec.”
Preparation for the trip to Canada, celebrating the Centennial
Saint-Légier tells me, laughing, that Leduc, our new ambassador to Ottawa, has conveyed, in an approving tone, the invitation from the government of Ottawa to celebrate the “centennial of Canada.” Indeed, Ottawa used this centennial to secure the hosting of the 1967 World's Fair in Montreal. Leduc suggested to the General that he send wishes to the Canadian government for the year of this centennial.
The General roared: “The centennial of Canada is as if we wanted to celebrate the bicentennial of France in 1989! Canada was founded over four hundred twenty years ago when Jacques Cartier took possession of it in the name of Francis I. After our defeat in 1759, there was a century of subjugation, and since 1867, institutional subordination. We are not going to commemorate this unfortunate date in our history!”
He added to the telegram the note: “There is no way of me sending a message to Canada to celebrate its ‘centennial’.” Followed by this note: “We have neither to congratulate the Canadians, nor ourselves, on the creation of a state founded on our past defeat and on the integration of a part of the French people into a British ensemble. Moreover, this ensemble has become quite precarious.”
February 1967
Saint-Légier warns me that the General is determined to travel to Quebec on the Colbert, the sister ship of the De Grasse; to sail up the Saint Lawrence River; to land in Quebec following the footsteps of Jacques Cartier, before heading to Ottawa. Absolute secrecy, until the elections are over, as the mere announcement of how the General plans to organize his itinerary could provoke a clash with Ottawa.
On the Caravelle returning from Cherbourg, March 29, 1967
After the launch of the submarine Redoutable, Messmer and I sit in the Caravelle next to the General. Before the engines start, Messmer asks him: “So, General, will you be going to Quebec?”
CDG: “I have received three invitations: one from the mayor of Montreal, Drapeau; another from the Governor General, Vanier; and the third from the Prime Minister of Quebec, Johnson. I would surely not have accepted the first two. But it is likely that I will accept the third. In that case, I will not go to Quebec for tourism. If I go, it will be to make history.”
Visit of Johnson, May 18, 1967
Daniel Johnson, the Prime Minister of Quebec, makes an official visit to Paris to prepare for the General's visit to Quebec. A flag war breaks out between the Canadian Embassy, which demands that only the federal maple leaf flag be displayed at the Orly reception, and the General Delegation of Quebec, which wants only the fleur-de-lis of the Quebecois standard.
Couve de Murville decides: “There will be no flags at all!”
The General, alerted by the “Quebecois lobby,” overturns the decision of his Foreign Minister: “There must only be Quebec flags! They must be everywhere!” And so it is done.
Upon arrival at Orly, Johnson states: “I hope this trip will rid us of the feeling of claustrophobia we suffer from in Quebec.”
Johnson pursues the same goals as Lesage, but adds a political message: the General's official visit to Quebec will be surrounded by his government with exceptional splendor, to enable the provincial government to negotiate new relations with English Canada and to transform the Constitution accordingly.
May 1967
The General calls him “Mr. President,” simply, as if he were more than a provincial Prime Minister. He proclaims: “Exemplary and very dear people, in whom, on the land where they live and whose resources they courageously develop, we see a branch of our own.”
What is more astonishing? The General's ability to lend all French people a vision that he is almost alone in having? Or the ability of the French journalistic-political world to remain blind and deaf to so many signs of an international action in preparation?
Parc des Princes, Sunday, May 21, 1967
Daniel Johnson and the General are set to attend the final of the French Cup at Parc des Princes. Joxe, Fouchet, and I are part of the group. We arrive at the Parc des Princes booth a few minutes before the General, who brings Daniel Johnson in his own car.
Wicker chairs await us. The chief of protocol, Bernard Durand, has placed cards on the chairs surrounding the larger chair reserved for the General: Joxe, Minister of Justice, to his right, and me next to him; Fouchet, Minister of the Interior, to his left and Johnson next to him.
“How come,” I say to Bernard Durand, “you place the Prime Minister after the three French ministers?”
“Naturally,” replies the chief of protocol, emphatically, “the Prime Minister of a province comes after the ministers of a sovereign state.”
Joxe smiles mischievously: “We shall see.”
It doesn't take long. Accompanied by his guest, the General arrives; Bernard Durand indicates his chair. Without hesitation, the General points to the place on his right for Johnson: “Please sit here, dear friend.” (He didn't just gesture, he took Johnson by the arm. Did he notice, on that chair, the card with Joxe's name?)
Joxe, Fouchet, and I then have to perform a little ballet to rearrange ourselves in our proper protocol order.
The ball, as if by design, is kicked right into the stand and nearly hits the General. Burin des Roziers leaps forward to protect him, the General takes the ball from him and, with a majestic gesture, throws it back onto the pitch, to the applause of the spectators.
De Gaulle 1967 Visit to Canada
July 23, 1967
On the eve of the General’s arrival, Johnson states in a press conference that the visit of the French President will enable English Canada to “become aware of the French fact” and for Quebeckers to “recognize themselves as a distinct group.”
He clearly develops a thesis that opposes that of Ottawa, but without merging with that of the General’s. Nationalism is not independence. Quebec wants to undertake negotiations with the federal government, not to separate from Canada, but to enable Quebecers to thrive in the fields of education, economy, and culture. Canada will only know internal peace by respecting its two cultures.
Everything was designed to make this trip a symbol. De Gaulle will travel up the Saint Lawrence, as Jacques Cartier did four hundred twenty-four years earlier. He has chosen the cruiser named Colbert—after the man who organized the administration of New France. He docked at Anse-au-Foulon, where Montcalm's enemy, Wolfe, had landed, whose memory he intends to erase.
The press dispatches, which I have delivered to me as soon as they arrive, show that the atmosphere is already charged.
At Anse-au-Foulon, while musicians in bearskin caps play “God Save the Queen,” the Quebecois crowd loudly sings “La Marseillaise” and shouts: “Vive la France!” The Quebec issue is starkly posed between France and England. How will de Gaulle handle it?
Quebec is decked with tricolor and fleur-de-lis flags and banners: “Vive de Gaulle,” “France — Quebec — Freedom,” “Free France — Free Quebec,” “Decolonization.”
General de Gaulle, responding to the Mayor of Quebec, Gilles La Montagne, salutes his city as the “capital of French Canada.” By this, he means it is not only the capital of French Canadians who live in Quebec, but also of those scattered across the other nine provinces.
General de Gaulle adds: “Here asserts itself a French-Canadian elite; it is the foundation of everything, it is the essence. Everything else will follow.”
General de Gaulle is unapologetically elitist. For a people to progress, it must have elites worthy of it. If these elites assert themselves, the people will follow.
The 270 kilometers between Quebec and Montreal are called the Chemin du Roy5 because the French settlers hoped for the arrival of the King of France and believed he would travel this route. The dreamed legend becomes lived history.
Triumphal arches have been erected at the entrance of cities and villages. Three hundred thousand French and Quebec flags have been distributed—and no Canadian flags. Large blue fleurs-de-lis, spaced two meters apart, have been painted all along the roadway.
The press dispatches come in.
Sainte-Anne-de-Beaupré has been a pilgrimage site since 1650: Breton sailors, miraculously escaping a storm in the St. Lawrence estuary, built a votive chapel there. Today, a vast basilica barely contains the faithful. The rector welcomes the General as the “savior, herald of French human and Christian culture worldwide.” Cardinal Roy, Primate of Canada, greets him as “the heritage of faith, fidelity, and courage of the French people from which we all originate.”
The General takes communion. An exceedingly rare gesture, a symbolic act: he communes with the faith of this people in God and in the homeland. In the nave, at his entrance and exit, the faithful acclaim him.
In Trois-Rivières, de Gaulle promises: “You will fulfill your wish; you will be what you want to be, masters of yourselves.”
July 24, 1967
From one speech to the next, the General repeats: “All of France is watching you. She hears you, she loves you.” He touches on a sensitive point. He has understood that the Québécois people languish in their solitude and crave affection. Obviously, he is right about the Québécois reality. He is wrong about the French reality: the French are utterly indifferent to Quebec. But, according to his principle, one must “pretend as if.”
Signs: “Quebec, French country,” “Quebec for the Québécois,” “We will have our French State.”
The General encounters a hostility from the Anglo-Saxons in Canada that wounds him. The English-Canadian newspapers downplay the significance of the visit. The Globe and Mail speaks of a “calm and reserved welcome,” Toronto Telegram of a “less than enthusiastic” reception. English Canadians, do not worry, the French President is visiting Clochemerle. The behavior of the press obviously reinforces his resolve.
The words that the General had been using among us for five years as an evident truth, he now proclaims openly to popular acclaim: “You wish to free yourselves, we can only encourage you.” “How could we not support your resolve to assert and emancipate yourselves?”
On the evening news, striking images of the General's speech from the balcony of Montreal's city hall. Most striking is hearing and seeing the enthusiasm of the crowd and the speaker resonate with each other.
“Long live free Quebec!” This evening's cry added nothing new to the message he had been conveying over the previous two days—that France supports the Québécois' will to self-determination. But the combination of these seemingly innocuous terms, Quebec and Free, unleashes extraordinary energy. Four words thrown to the crowd have created a shockwave that resonates throughout all of Canada and the world.
Pointing out American as well as Soviet hegemony, condemning the United States in Phnom Penh, was already bold. Yet, he had never gone as far as going to the doorstep of the United States to encourage the Québécois to loosen the cultural and economic corset in which their powerful Anglo-Saxon neighbors were suffocating them.
He performed the reparative gesture he deemed necessary to compensate for two centuries of neglect.
In the international press, the scandal is huge. Especially, of course, in the English-speaking press. The Times does not hesitate to write: “We must resign ourselves to enduring the provocations of the President of the French Republic during the long and sad decline of his faculties.”
Added to the brilliance of the cry issued by the General is the brilliance of the shortened trip. That the General did not accept that what he said was found “unacceptable” was consistent. Yet, the abrupt cancellation of the ceremonies prepared in the federal capital will only amplify the scandal of the phrase.
But how could the General not have disinvited himself in Ottawa? The Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Paul Martin, had immediately disinvited himself from the dinner offered by the General at the French pavilion of the Montreal Expo.
Montréal, July 25th
During the General’s visit to the Exposition, the mass of the crowd repeats in unison: “Long live free Quebec!”
Aftermath of De Gaulle’s actions in Québec
Orly, July 27, 1967, 3:30 AM
The entire airport terminal is shrouded in darkness. The “isba,” where we gather, is lit up as if to celebrate the occasion.
Pompidou, the first to seize the moment when loyalty to the General must be loudly and clearly asserted, has rallied us. He had Jobert phone us all with this message: “You must not miss the General's return, despite the inconvenient hour: it is an opportunity to show unwavering solidarity.” All the government members are there, with a single exception: Edgar Faure through his office made it known that he disapproved of the General's remarks in Montreal and would show this by his absence.
Side by side, the ministers share their impressions.
At least half, it seems to me, are frankly troubled. Pompidou just seems amused. One minister, mocking, says aloud what many are thinking quietly: “The Old Man, he's not all there anymore.” “He's lost his mind!” says another. “He was intoxicated by the fervor of the crowd,” says a third. Several agree: “He was carried away by this delirious reception.”
And yet, it would be quite odd if the General had been swept away by popular acclaim. On July 24, 1967, his emotion could not have exceeded that of August 25, 1944, when he walked through the enthusiastic crowd of liberated Paris and bluntly refused to yield to Bidault's demands: he had decided not to proclaim the Republic, since he had brought it with him and it had never ceased to exist. He had decided to proclaim Quebec free, since he believed that this people had not been free for two hundred years. The call for freedom on July 24 was no more improvised than the call to resistance on June 18. It was the result of long reflection, transformed into unshakeable resolution.
Not far from us, on one side, a few members of the Canadian embassy, looking gloomy and uneasy; on the other, members of the Quebec delegation, beaming.
When the General arrives, he pretends to be surprised to see us: “What, so many of you! This is not a time to get up, or to stay up! You shouldn't have troubled yourselves at this hour, it's not reasonable!” There is no doubt, however, that he would have been affected had we not bolstered him with our massive presence. After shaking each of our hands individually, he gathers us into a circle around him and begins to speak to us as a teacher to his students on a botanical excursion:
“I went to Quebec to help the Quebecois escape their subordinate situation. Quebec has awakened, France has stood up. It was time for the French to wake up to the Quebec question as well. It's true that the press doesn't help us in this regard, and (he says, turning to Gorse) neither does the radio or television, from what I'm told. But all that, those are just episodes. The essential thing was to get to the heart of the matter; and we went there.”
“This trip caused a kind of shock. A shock that neither the French Canadians who welcomed me nor I myself could prevent. A fundamental shock. Everyone was affected by it. We couldn't just settle for euphemisms. We couldn't beat around the bush. We dispelled any hidden reservations. It was necessary to respond to the call of this people. I would not have been myself if I hadn't done so.”
“The people of Quebec are in the process of liberating themselves. They were in a humiliating situation of inferiority in their own country, built by their ancestors. It was a typically colonial situation. They have become increasingly aware of this over the last few years. My visit has somewhat crystallized all these feelings. The Quebecois are now reassured about themselves. They have the will to speak and live in French in their own home, to take their destiny into their own hands, to be masters in their own house. Quebec is French, I believe, forever.”
When he leaves, he whispers to me, “I need to see you. Can you come tomorrow?” “You mean today?”
”Check with Tricot."We still remain there, seized by this mountain-moving faith. I approach Couve, who is standing back and seems gloomy. He simply tells me, laconically, “Well, there you go!”
”And what do you think?”
”He was wrong.”I try to find out more. He eventually snaps, “He must know that Quebec's independence is impossible. It can only lead to disaster.”
I then join Admiral Philippon, dressed in white with gold buttons: “Do you think it was an improvisation?” He smiles and tells me, “Oh, I really don't think so! On the deck of the Colbert, during the crossing of the Atlantic, he came to stretch his legs and told me he was writing the speeches he was going to give: ‘What would you say if I shouted: Vive le Québec libre?’ I replied, ‘Oh, you're not going to do that, General! — Well, I think I might! It will depend on the atmosphere.’”
The procession is about to start. I offer to drive Jean-Daniel Jurgensen back to Paris. He's an old friend; he might give me some insider information from the team. I ask him if the General knew that by using the phrase “Québec libre”, he was adopting the slogan of the supporters of the “Rassemblement pour l'indépendance nationale” (RIN), as suspected by the Anglo-Saxon press. Did he mean to encourage this separatist movement? Or did he make an honest mistake, unaware that this expression was part of the separatist vocabulary?
Jurgensen's response is categorical. According to him, the General was completely unaware of the existence of the RIN. He, who has always denounced the party system in France, was not about to follow any Quebecois party. He wanted to send a message beyond the activists and banner carriers, to the Quebecois people, giving it a general significance in the face of the universe.
Jurgensen tells me that he understood the Quebec problem himself from his first trip. He had come to spend a weekend there with his wife during a session of the United Nations General Assembly. In Montreal, which looked like any American city, they stayed in a hotel where everyone spoke English. In Quebec, the doorman at the Château Frontenac Hotel refused them a room they had requested in French. They then addressed the concierge in English, who immediately found them one.
He confides to me, “When leaving Montreal, the General called me over to him on the plane. I told him, ‘You have paid the debt of Louis XV.’ He took up the phrase, I think it pleased him.” Jurgensen had found the words that could most touch the General, both of them steeped in history.
The General added, “Louis XV certainly had the means to send more troops after Montcalm's death, to allow Lévis to triumph over the English. He frivolously gave in to the ridicule of the Court, which mocked, as Voltaire did, ‘a few acres of snow towards Canada.’ He abandoned our sixty thousand colonists to their fate. It was a dishonorable act. It had to be erased.”
[…]
Salon doré, July 29, 1967
Two days later, the General receives me to give me his instructions. I first stop by Saint-Légier's office. He is sorting the pile of telegrams on his desk. They have been addressed to General de Gaulle by Canadians who are either exasperated or enthusiastic. The first group's telegrams are written in English, or more rarely in poor French; the latter in good French.
I am led into the Salon doré.
CDG: “There you have it! History is only moved forward by forceful actions. From now on, English Canadians will no longer be able to act as if the issue of French Canada does not exist.”
“I have acknowledged the French essence, which had manifested itself brilliantly. The day on the Chemin du Roy had demonstrated that the French Canadians were in communion with the French President. It was striking. I was merely a spark.”
He looks up. It's the military leader speaking, as if he were still commanding an armored division: “You should go to Quebec within the next two or three weeks. We've made a breakthrough. Now, we need to occupy the ground. I'm entrusting this to you. Quebeckers need teachers, educators, childcare workers. They need to be reintegrated into the circuit of universal French. They want this, but they can't do it on their own. The agreements we have signed with them in recent years are a step in the right direction, but it's still very insufficient. We need to lend them our teachers on a large scale, host their students massively. Anyway, think about all this. It's your responsibility. You need to cover everything: education, culture, technology, scientific research, youth, television. And when this program is ready, you will present it to Johnson.”
AP: “I understand the maneuver and am fully prepared to execute it. But in two or three weeks, I don't see how. Nothing is ready. The civil service and the budget will be on holiday, like all of France. I won't be able to develop a substantial program without holding several inter-ministerial meetings. It seems impossible to complete this mission before September.”
CDG (after a few seconds: he does not like to be resisted): “Well, see to it, but do not waste time! You need to develop a framework agreement so that everyone understands that what I said was not just hot air, but the announcement of a very concrete reality. The French Canadians understood the meaning of my visit. They have regained confidence in themselves. This moment could be fleeting. We must give a strong impulse and maintain the momentum, so that it becomes irreversible.”
“See what can be developed: scholarships for our Grandes Ecoles, for nurses, whatever. No empty words! Concrete measures for immediate implementation. For once, logistics must follow, and quickly.”
(Having given these practical instructions, he regains his broader perspective.)
"I've shaken up the flower pot. My adversaries and false friends will not forgive me for a long time. My true friends will rejoice.”
It seems he needs to reassure himself, or at least to assure himself: “It wasn't me who encouraged the Quebecois to undertake the ‘Quiet Revolution.’ It was Lesage who, upon taking power, came to us asking for France's support to defend the French fact. It was he who wanted the establishment of a General Delegation of Quebec in Paris, so that we could have direct relations without going through Ottawa. It was he who insisted that this delegation have diplomatic status.”
“Our duty is to help the Quebecois not to dissolve. In the Anglophone vastness, that's the danger they face. You know, Anglo-Saxon domination proliferates like algae. The English and the federal administration are encamped among the Quebecois as if in a colony.”
“For two centuries, France has owed a debt to the French of Canada. What I've tried to give them is self-confidence; confidence in the new France; confidence in the France of Europe; confidence in the mutual support they can provide each other. But this confidence needs to be nurtured. For my visit not to have been just a flash in the pan, we need to add logs to the fire. They will only believe in the promised aid if it materializes quickly.”
AP: “Do we have the means to provide them with the necessary assistance?”
CDG: “We don't need to be wealthy to be heard. There is honor in being poor. Gilles de Rais had taken as his motto, to lead his men: ‘Glory and Wealth’' But Joan of Arc replied: ‘The man who speaks thus is the lowest of men.’ Glory and Wealth, that's also what Bonaparte promised to the Army of Italy. We chose, for Free France, ‘Honor and Fatherland’6: we were poor, but we had the essentials within us.”
AP: “Why, when you visited Quebec officially in April 1960, was the public everywhere lukewarm and sparse, including in Montreal? And why such fervor today?”
CDG: “It wasn’t ripe yet.”
AP: “What has ripened in the meantime?”
CDG: “In '60, direct relations between Quebec and France had not yet been established. The Lesage government set up a Quebec house in Paris. Our relations became more frequent. And above all, the Quebecois people realized that they needed to have control over their own destiny.”
AP (persistently): “Still, the contrast between the cool audience of '60 and these delirious crowds, it's strange.”
CDG: “You know, over these seven years, Quebec has awakened. It no longer wants merely to survive; it wants to be free. What has happened is the emergence of a people who intend to become masters of their own fate. And at the same time, France has asserted itself, applied the principle of the right of peoples to self-determination, and has become the spokesperson for peoples who wish to enjoy this right. Thus, these two developments have come together.”
I bring him back to the Belgian question, mentioned two years ago. He is less definitive than before.
AP: “Don't you think that the Walloons, after the Quebecois, might now also be tempted to emancipate themselves?”
CDG: “Perhaps. Belgium is a fragile state. But the problem is not the same as in Canada. Wallonia and Flanders are more or less balanced. There doesn't seem to be a risk of one oppressing the other.”
“I know well that after the Liberation, it would have sufficed for me to snap my fingers for Wallonia to request attachment to France. But precisely, I felt it was not my place to snap my fingers. It would have had to be the Walloons or their legitimate representatives who took the initiative. France did not have a debt to pay like in Canada. At one point, I thought about making a journey that would have started in Ghent, stopped in Dinant where I was wounded in '14, in Namur, the capital of Wallonia, and then traveled down the Meuse to Liège, which Michelet said was more French than France. It would have been like the Chemin du Roy in Quebec. But I resisted the temptation.”
“Note that since my return to power, one of my first initiatives was to invite the King and Queen of Belgium. My invitation was never reciprocated. They were probably too afraid of popular demonstrations in Wallonia.”
He continues, after a few seconds: “I had received a delegation of Walloons, determined to prepare for attachment. They explained to me that the Flemish were becoming increasingly arrogant and would end up seceding themselves. Perhaps that's how it will end.”
“Wallonia exists, but there isn't a Walloon nation; the Walloons have never sought to become a state. They ask to be integrated into the French Republic, of which they have already been a part. It's quite different from the Quebecois seeking to emancipate themselves from Anglo-Saxon domination.”
“Many Walloons think they would be better treated by France than by Flanders. That's likely. They would regain within France the pride of belonging to a great nation, the pride of their language and culture, the taste for participating in the great affairs of the world, and fighting for great human causes.”
“All things they lost in their unnatural association, imposed by the English, with the Flemish who do not love them and whom they do not love. For the sake of Belgian unity, what made them different was pared down. They are frustrated by this.”
“There is a Belgian discomfort, just as there is a Canadian one. It should not be ruled out that it might lead to a crisis, especially if the balance between the two factions were to break.”
AP: “So, what did you say to this delegation?”
CDG: “The Walloons were eager to throw themselves into the arms of France. But at the end of the war, we had enough difficulties with the English and the Americans without adding that one. So, I sent my visitors off to a more distant future. I told them that the history of peoples is long, that they last longer than any artificial constructions that can be imposed on them. And that the day Wallonia, through the voice of its legitimate representatives, or preferably by referendum, decided to be reattached to France, we would welcome them with open arms.”
“You know,” he concluded, “nothing is ever definitively lost in the life of peoples, if their leaders do not surrender to the false fatalities of history.”
As he walked me out, he said slowly, with a smile that resembled an inner light: “There is immense resistance of things. It can only be overcome by shaking up habits and creating new ones. It's not in four days that one can erase two centuries of submission. Now we must make France present in Quebec and Quebec present in France. It's up to you to work on that.”
[…]
Council of July 31, 1967
This is the first Cabinet meeting after his return. Couve narrates with discreet emotion what he has seen. Then the General speaks.
CDG: “I had long been pressed to go to Canada, that is, to French Canada. As there was the Montreal Expo, I was invited by the federal government, the mayor, and Johnson.”
“So off I went. I knew there would be demonstrations, but I did not know the extent. It was truly a French outpouring, a unanimous magnitude. The French fact that manifested itself was brilliant, much more than I had imagined.”
“Another thing was clear. French Canada no longer accepts the system in which it is confined.”
“After our departure, two hundred and four years ago, for one hundred and four years the French were governed by the English. Withdrawn into themselves, confining themselves to their farms, they kept their language, their identity, passionately. But France made no contact with them.”
"In 1867, there was the 'Act of British America.' In reality, authority remained in the hands of the English. The people no longer want this domination in which they still find themselves. They haven't completely rejected it because they hadn't yet become fully aware of themselves.”
"Three themes were developed, either by our interlocutors or by ourselves.
1. They are a part of the French people.
2. They must take control of their destiny.
3. Why didn't France take care of us?Of course, our royal government had the wars of the continent on its hands; it could no longer send a fleet overseas. But above all, there was a renunciation by the cadres, the elites. The very essence of the French population wasn't interested. There were personalities, Champlain, Montcalm, like Lally-Tollendal or Dupleix in India. But the masses hardly cared about it. And when we left, the capable people returned to France. Only the little people remained.”
“They were 60,000 then; they are six and a half million now. They have a deep feeling: why did France abandon us for so long? I took charge of this unanimous and evident passion. Since I was France, I spoke unequivocally.”
“I didn't say, ‘Rebel.’ They will have to make arrangements with the English. There is the proximity of the Americans. They must be part of a whole and get along with their neighbors. But based on freedom, independence. They are moving towards the establishment of a state. After that, there will be arrangements, federal or otherwise. The federal government couldn't let this pass. They issued this statement after which it was impossible to go to Ottawa.”
“There was an operation that France had to carry out for two hundred and four years. This operation has been done. It will have consequences, to the extent that French Canada wants it, and it does. France doesn't have to draw conclusions. They will be drawn in Canada, internationally and nationally.”
“Since it was a French operation, it triggered the fury of everything Anglo-Saxon, which was deeply affected. There was immense hypocrisy on the English side. They wanted to conceal the situation, deceive, make it seem like it wasn't like that, when it was. That's natural. What's not natural, what's unimaginable, is the attitude of the French press, or so-called.”
“I said that Quebec must be free. It will be. It is France alone that for two hundred and fifty years created and populated Canada, gave it its soul and spirit. We cannot lose interest in Canada. We cannot consider Canada on the same level as other countries. Things are not settled. They are just beginning.”
“A final word on French Canadian universities. They only dedicated themselves to industrialization very late. But there you find an ardent youth; these young people are determined to become masters of their own country.”
[…]
Council of August 23, 1967
Couve assesses the state of Franco-Quebec relations: education, culture, economy, finances. He rejoices in what works and laments what doesn't, as if he had unreservedly embraced the General's ideas about the “French of Canada.”
The General resumes: “The French fact of Canada is now on the table, sentimentally and politically, both locally and in France. It's a nearly unique situation in the world: a country whose part of its people is elsewhere.”
Isn’t the General perhaps overstating? Haven't the British left part of their people in the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand? And hadn't France left part of its people in Algeria before the Algerians forced them to repatriate?
“Formerly,” he continues, “the French of Canada had allowed themselves to be sidelined from progress. Now, they are determined to catch up and double their efforts. Quebec has awakened and as France, on its part, has resurged, the Quebecois turn to France. It's a significant fact; new because of their own evolution, and perhaps ours as well.”
“We cannot cooperate with Quebec like any other country; this unique case must be privileged. Additionally, we need to help the Quebecois establish a state and a public service. They need to be endowed with a National School of Administration. As for the economy, we have no real relations with Quebec. French business leaders, as always, care little for the national interest. They prefer to invest in the United States or Ontario, whereas we should be creating a real economic osmosis with Quebec. We can help them develop in nuclear energy, aerospace industry, electronics, and computer science. The Quebecois would not want to be condemned to a tête-à-tête with the American NASA.”
[…]
After several interministerial meetings, we have selected 25 actions. On September 1, 1967, a restricted council ratified these actions. The number of French teachers sent to Quebec would increase from one hundred to one thousand over three years, as would the scholarships offered to Quebec students to study in France.
Salon doré, the same day, the General, in a one-on-one meeting, is eager to get to the crux of the matter, which is political; a core where form counts for much.
CDG: “You must not go to Ottawa! Make your arrangements accordingly! It has been too little time since the incident occurred. The English Canadians have failed me. We must make them understand that one does not act this way. They were blind to the French fact; it's not my fault if this French fact revealed itself. Do not appear apologetic by visiting them in Ottawa.”
AP: “There's a good reason to go to Quebec, where the Biennale of the French Language is being held, and to Montreal, since there's the Expo.”
CDG: “Of course! But don't feel obligated to go to the federal capital! Moreover, there's no reason for French ministers who visit Montreal or Quebec in the future to make a pilgrimage to Ottawa. Just recently, a Canadian minister came to commemorate the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Dieppe raid, but he did not come to Paris. Why should we do more than them?” (Nothing escapes him.)
“Of course, the Quai d'Orsay is not adapting to all this. These people are Anglophiles. They are afraid to promote French interests. Besides, this is not a new issue. That's why, for two hundred years, we had never taken care of the French of Canada.”
He returns to a theme he has often discussed, which is so central to him that he does not hesitate to repeat himself: Ottawa is celebrating this year the centenary of the so-called Canadian Confederation. “In reality, it's not a confederation, it's a federation, which claims to be solely sovereign, denies any sovereignty to the provinces, and has placed the French in a humiliating position. There's always some Laurier or Saint-Laurent to serve as a puppet. But it's the English who pull the strings.”
AP: "In your speeches in Quebec, you didn't touch these notions of ‘confederation’ or ‘federation.’”
CDG: “Those are not topics for open-air speeches. But it was well understood that I didn't go to Quebec to celebrate the centenary of the Canadian Constitution, but to seal the reunion of European France and American France. In this false confederation, the provinces are not sovereign. The essence of a confederation is to be composed of sovereign states, which can secede. The vocabulary of the 19th century was still vague. What is desirable today is for Quebec to form a confederation, in the modern sense of the word, with the Anglophone provinces which, if they wish, could form among themselves what they already are, namely a federation.”
“On the basis of this previously recognized sovereignty, Quebec could share specific competencies—economic, monetary, common security—like France agrees or will agree to do within the European framework. But first, Quebec needs to change its status. If Quebec is strong, French Canadians throughout Canada will all the more so proudly raise their heads.”
AP: “There is an unmistakable sign. Among the new immigrants in Quebec—from Central Europe, Germany, Italy, Greece—nine out of ten choose to assimilate with the Anglophone minority rather than the Francophone majority. They understand that the minority is dominant and the majority is dominated.”
CDG: “Of course, the English put pressure on them in this direction! Even in Quebec. Canada consists of two distinct entities, one that is a part of the French people, the other that is a part of the English people, with additional immigrants who are immediately directed towards this second entity! The French hold political power there, and that's their chance. Their only chance.”
[…]
Krakow, September 9, 1967, 8:30 AM
He hands me a handwritten letter, in an unsealed envelope addressed to “H.E. Mr. Daniel Johnson, Premier of Quebec.” I pretend to close it.
“No, no, read it. And you would do well to make a copy; I don't have a duplicate. Upon your return, give this copy to my aides-de-camp; they will handle it for the archives. But for now, there is no need to discuss it with the Quai d'Orsay.” (meaning: “I forbid you to talk to Couve about it”)
I carefully copy it on the plane. He wrote it by hand the night before, but did not date it from Krakow. The terms are pressing:
“September 8, 1967
My dear Prime Minister,
It seems that the great national operation for the advent of Quebec, as you pursue it, is well underway. The emergence of the French fact in Canada is now accomplished under such conditions that—everyone feels—it requires solutions. It is hardly doubtful anymore that the evolution will lead to a Quebec that governs itself in all respects.
For our French Community, it is therefore—don't you think?—the time to intensify what has already been undertaken. In the financial, economic, scientific, and technical fields, my government will soon be able to make precise proposals to yours regarding our joint effort. As for culture and education, Mr. Peyrefitte, to whom I entrust this letter, will indicate what the government of Paris is ready to do immediately, which is quite considerable.
Let me repeat that I was deeply touched by the welcome Quebec gave me and how satisfying our meetings and discussions on the soil of French Canada were, following those in Paris.
Asking you to present to Mrs. Daniel Johnson my most respectful regards, to which my wife adds her best memories, I ask you to believe, my dear Prime Minister, in my highest and friendly consideration."
The General specified what he expected from me. First, a mission that would become public at its conclusion: “Negotiate close cooperation agreements with the government of Quebec. Essentially, everything you have prepared and that the Council of Ministers ratified before our departure for Poland.”
Then, a secret mission. The General took a breath, as he does when he wants to say something important: “Furthermore, I would like to propose to Johnson to establish the same organization between Quebec and France as exists between France and Germany. There is absolutely no reason for us to have more distant relations with the Quebecois, the only French people living en masse outside of France, than with our former hereditary enemies. Thus, once a year, the Prime Minister and the main ministers of Quebec should come to Paris to meet us, and six months later, the President and Prime Minister of France, with the principal ministers, should return the visit to Quebec.”
AP: “There's a difference with federal Germany, it's an independent state whose government is sovereign; whereas Quebec is a province of a federal state and the provincial government is not free of its actions.”
CDG: “Exactly, to help it advance, we need to create faits accomplis! The Quebecois would indeed like to be a sovereign country, but they don't know how to go about it. Whereas the visits that we would pay each other would create new habits.”
“It's not as if we are declaring war on Canada! Canada is controlled by the English or by the French collaborators. We have no reason to have hostile relations with them. But it must be recognized that French Canadians have reasons to feel closer to France than to the English Canadians.”
“What we are ready to do politically is much more significant than what we will do in the technical fields. For this part of your mission, you must probe Johnson while trying to convince him. Try to stoke the fires. But do not talk about it with anyone.”
Starting, obviously, with the head of the Quai d'Orsay, who is having breakfast in the same Wawel Castle, just a few meters from us.
It is curious that the General asked me to bypass Couve for this special mission, even though a year ago, in September 1966, he had charged him to go to Quebec and propose to Johnson the creation of a permanent commission of French and Quebecois ministers, which would be responsible for managing relations between “the two French communities.” It was still only a matter of transposing the Franco-Soviet Commission system.
It was less daring than copying the Franco-German system; but it was indeed about organizing direct links between “the two French communities,” and thus bypassing Ottawa… Couve had scrupulously carried out this delicate mission and had even made public statements in Quebec that strongly supported this direction. Why was the General hiding from his Foreign Minister who, as always, had been perfectly loyal to him a year later? Probably after “Québec libre,” he felt that Couve disapproved of this “word too many.”
I pointed out to him that by applying the Franco-German cooperation institutions to Quebec, he would be led to return there himself each year, which would not be without raising difficulties with Canada.
CDG: “Exactly, we are going to propose increasingly close bilateral cooperation to Quebec, which will de facto result in France treating Quebec as a sovereign state.”
“Each visit will be an opportunity to warm sentiments. For the world to progress, there need to be moments of exaltation that meet the deep aspirations of peoples.”
Thus, along the Chemin du Roy and from the balcony of the Montreal City Hall, the General had triggered phase one of the operation he had cherished for at least six years. Upon returning to Paris, he triggered phase two: ambitious bilateral cooperation. In Krakow, he triggered phase three: leading to France treating Quebec as a sovereign state.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
He is referring here to the attacks in March 1963 of the Quebec Liberation Front. Three Molotov cocktails thrown at barracks of the Victoria Rifles Armory, the Royal Montreal Regiment, and at the 4th Battalion Royal 22nd Regiment. The projectiles were ineffective and little to no damage was done.
Emiles Combes, best known for the Law separating the State and the Church in 1905.
In 1970, long after De Gaulle had left power, a charter is signed, at the initative of President Senghor of Senegal, by the representatives of 21 French-speaking countries in Niamey during an intergovernmental conference of French speaking nations. It gives birth to the “Agence de coopération culturelle et technique.” In 1986, the first summit of Francophonie is held at Versailles. The charter is revised in 1997, giving birth to the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie, its first secretary-general being Boutros Boutros-Ghali, former secretary general of the United Nations. Today, the organization comprises 88 member states and governments (including observers such as Argentina, Mexico, Armenia, etc)
“The King’s Road”
Note that this slogan was taken directly from Napoleon’s motto for the Legion of Honor, which figures on every one of its medals. De Gaulle had to compromise on this after the war and re-adopted the Republican slogan “Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité”