The Press TUESDAY, APRIL 29, 1969. France: End Of An Era

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 31974, 29 April 1969, Page 14

The Press TUESDAY, APRIL 29, 1969. France: End Of An Era

Like Sir Winston Churchill, General Charles de Gaulle will go down in history as a great patriot. Whatever his faults—among which arrogance must certainly be numbered—he retained an unshakeable conviction of his country’s greatness as a world Power. Churchill’s rule was ended when the British public decided, in the first post-war election, that patriotism was not the primary qualification for a peace-time leader, de Gaulle’s reign has also been ended by a vote of no-confidence from his electorate. Just as Churchill’s fall from power called forth many critical assessments of his achievements and mistakes —on which the last word has assuredly not yet been said —so a balanced judgment of de Gaulle must await the deliberations of biographers and historians. At this time, however, one judgment can be made with confidence: Charles de Gaulle gave France 10 years of economic and political stability which enabled the country to play a role in world affairs which had been denied to the earlier succession of rapidly-changing French Governments. General de Gaulle had declared his intention of resigning in the event of the country’s failing to approve his electoral reforms. He was as good as his word. Although the referendum on Sunday was close, the 53-47 vote against the proposals was construed by the President as a vote of no-confidence in himself. The reform programme sought by the President would have deprived the Senate of some of its powers and conferred some degree of autonomy on provincial legislatures. These constitutional changes, at first glance, seemed designed to whittle awav the power of the presidency which General de Gaulle has so jealously guarded. On closer examination, they seem by no means certain to have had such an effect. The old constitution provided for the President of the Senate to take over as Head of State if the elected President did not complete his term of office. The present incumbent. Mr Alain Poher. has recently shown himself opposed to many of President de Gaulle s policies. The devolution of political power would have mollified many provincial politicians who have chafed for years under the firm control exercised from Paris It would have clipped the wings of the “ inspectors ”, the elite of the French public service, who exercise more political power under the administrative system of France than is exercised by most members of other Parliaments. The proposed devolution of power, however, was described as more apparent than real. President de Gaulle’s abdication will lead to a struggle for power which, at best, may disrupt French politics for weeks: at worst, it might plunge the country into months of economic and social upheaval. The experience of the early post-war years, when business stagnated and the franc went through successive devaluations, are a stern reminder to middle-aged Frenchmen of the consequences of political instability. The riots and strikes of last May are more recent evidence that basic conflicts between sectional interests were repressed rather than reconciled by President de Gaulle’s regime. Strikes, riots, devaluation, and a succession of minority governments may be in store for France: but even though de Gaulle has left. Gaullism is not dead. His supporters and his policies will not disappear overnight. In particular, the General's opposition to American capital and influence in France, and to British membership of the European Economic Community, is widely shared in Europe. Some softening of these attitudes is now to be expected: but they will not be changed overnight. The immediate anxiety of the Governments of Britain and of the United States will be to see the establishment of a stable regime in France. Without it there must be an ever-present threat of chaos in world currency markets —a danger to international trade and to the value of the pound and the dollar.