Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

The Failure of French Decolonization

by Oui Thu Nov 10th, 2022 at 10:33:17 AM EST

Two events stood out today. De Gaulle would not refer to the de-colonization of Algeria as a war, just referred to "events." From colonies, De Gaulle attempted to build a form of "cooperation" to reap benefits out of former colonies. Opposition leaders were quite often eliminated by any means under the pretense of "communist sympathies".

A documentary in four parts on Al Jazeera ...

Blood and Tears: French Decolonization

Why is Algeria angry at Emmanuel Macron? | Inside Story |


French colonial rule in Algeria lasted 132 years, beginning in 1830 with the invasion of the capital, Algiers, and continuing until the war for independence, which concluded with the signing of the Evian Accords in March 1962.

The treaty marked the end of a bitter war. Between 1954 and 1962 up to 1.5 million Algerians are believed to have died. French forces repressed any form of resistance, particularly those fighting for independence, known as mujahideen.

After decolonization, France set up a new form under the umbrella of participation named France-Afrique ...

Macron unveils shift in military posture as war returns to Europe

France's new strategic document provides that the country will maintain a "capacity to lead military operations, including those of high intensity, alone or within a coalition."

French troops will maintain their large presence abroad in an area stretching from sub-Saharan Africa to the Middle East, through the Horn of Africa, Macron said.

He said France will launch talks in coming days with its African partners and regional organizations to make changes to the "status, format and missions of the current French military bases in the Sahel and West Africa." A new organization, based on cooperation between French and local armed forces, will be finalized withing six months of the discussions, he said.

Macron's speech marks the formal end of the so-called Barkhane force after France withdrew its troops from Mali earlier this year following tensions with the ruling military regime.

French operations to help fighting Islamic extremists in the Sahel region are focusing on Niger, Chad and Burkina Faso, where the country has about 3,000 troops.

A perfect illustration from the film: "The Mouse That Roared."

Despite all words of projections and promises, to save the planet Europe and NATO cannot engage in futile wars to the benefit of global hegemony of U.S. Colonization by other means. The Pentagon and US NATO Command in Brussels aren't democratic institutions, but are nearly autonomous run by the Military Industrial Complex [add Five Eyes] Dwight Eisenhower warned the world about. Today Big Tech has joined foreign wars of oppression without any political oversight. What started with the "Arab Spring" in 2011 continues unabated today. Pegasus manifest in Europe. Undemocracy reigns.

Translation:
We will not sacrifice our climate commitments under the energy threat from Russia.

Russia Is Connected to Western Europe

Les USA avec De Gaulle, ce n'était pas l'Amérique

De Gaulle was the man of facts, nothing but facts. His main qualities were his great memory and a long-term vision, a clear-sighted and fundamentally independent spirit.

On January 4, 1963, De Gaulle said:

    "Western Europe has become, without even realizing it, a protectorate of the Americans. Now it is a question of getting rid of this domination. But the difficulty in this case is that the colonized do not really seek to emancipate themselves. The views of the Pentagon on planetary strategy, the views of American business on the world economy, are imposed on us. Many Europeans are in favor of it." (Excerpts: It was De Gaulle by Alain Peyrefitte)

This observation of yesterday has lost none of its accuracy today.

On January 22, 1963, a treaty of cooperation and reconciliation was signed between France and the Federal Republic of Germany, without the blessing of the USA, which was faced with a fait accompli. It is the beginning of a political Europe, having nothing to do with a Europe of markets.

Still at the beginning of the year, but in 1964, De Gaulle created the diplomatic event, by being the first politician of international stature, to have People's China recognized by France, without asking permission from the USA.

And here is what he says: "there is something abnormal in the fact that we have no relations with the most populous country in the world, on the pretext that its regime does not please the Americans" remarks made and reported by Alain Peyrefitte.

On June 20, 1966 De Gaulle made an official visit to the USSR, without anyone's agreement, no doubt doing good measure with the beginning of rapprochement with Communist China. This visit will be accompanied by numerous cooperation agreements, always in the spirit of independence which was his.

These significant agreements revealed, to say the least, a desire to open all the doors closed by decision of others.

How to become a powerful nation when your country does not have a large population, nor a large area, and devoid of raw materials such as oil and gas?

Nuclear deterrence then became his ultimate desire, ignoring all other priorities, leading to the Geneva Accords of 1962, to the great displeasure of the Pieds Noirs and the Harkis.

Indeed, it needed an adequate territory, and insurance over a long period. The first nuclear test in the open air was in 1960, and from 1961 until 1966, the tests will be underground, all in southern Algeria.

Nuclear tests will continue in the Pacific, even after the resignation of De Gaulle
The attitude of the vassal under the protection of the United States was coming to an end.

France had American NATO bases on its soil. In 1958, when De Gaulle arrived, the American military strength was 50,417 soldiers, the last will leave in 1967.

De Gaulle will add a last oral provocation with "vive le Québec libre" on July 24, 1967.
It is undeniable that his obsession to free himself from the influence of the USA, goes through Europe (speech of November 22, 1959 in Strasbourg)

"Yes, it is Europe, from the Atlantic to the Urals, it is Europe, it is all of Europe, which will decide the fate of the world"

Press conference of May 15, 1962

"There can be no other Europe than the Europe of States" 

Q. - What are the reasons that have determined France to present a project - known as Plan Fouchet - political organization of the Europe of the Six?

De Gaulle - In a world where everything boils down to the threat of a general conflict, the idea of ​​a united Western Europe which would have enough strength, enough means and enough cohesion to exist on its own, this this idea appears quite naturally. Especially since the enmities that had secularly torn Europe apart, in particular the opposition between Germany and France, have now ceased. As a result, here is brought to light, first of all the character that can be called complementary - from the geographical, strategic, economic, cultural, etc. point of view. - of the peoples of this part of the ancient continent, Western Europe. And then, at the same time, the overall capacity they represent in terms of power, production, creation, exchanges, in relation to the general activity of the universe. Finally, the possibilities that their whole could offer to the two billion men who populate the underdeveloped countries. These are facts that have led six States of the Continent to try to establish special links between them.

Already, during the world war - I take the liberty of recalling this - I proclaimed that this development was one of the essential aims of France. In this order of ideas, we have already done something positive called the European Economic Community which was created, in principle, by the Treaty of Rome and implemented, first of all, thanks to our economic recovery and Financial of 1958 and 1959 - because, if we did not make this recovery, there was no Community that held. - Implementation, in the second place, thanks to the fact that, last January, we obtained that agriculture enter the Common Market and, correlatively, agreed to move on to the second phase, that is to say a real app. There is thus an economic organization such that, little by little, the customs barriers between the Six are being erased. This does not fail to arouse their efforts, while, gradually, their respective productions are adjusted, regulated, so that the Common Market can, in good order, either absorb them itself, or exchange them abroad. out. It's something, it's a lot, it's not all.

In the eyes of France, this economic construction is not enough. Western Europe - whether it is a question of its action vis-à-vis other peoples, or of its own defence, or of its contribution to the development of regions which need it, or of its duty to detente and international balance - Western Europe must constitute itself politically. Moreover, if it did not succeed in this, the Economic Community itself could not in the long run become stronger, or even maintain itself. In other words, Europe needs institutions that lead it to form a political whole, as it already is in the economic order.

France therefore took the initiative to propose such an organization and you know that, last year in April, the six Heads of State or Government met in Paris to discuss its project. They did it again in Bonn in July. Then, a political commission was formed in Paris - the Fouchet commission - which was intended to finalize the text of a treaty of union. In the meantime, many bilateral and multilateral meetings were taking place on this subject. It was finally agreed that a summit meeting of the Six would be held in Rome to conclude, if necessary. We know why and we know how we have not yet succeeded.

What does France offer its five partners? I repeat it once more. To organize ourselves politically, let's start at the beginning. Let's organize our cooperation. Let us periodically bring together our Heads of State or Government so that they can jointly examine the problems which are ours and so that they can take decisions regarding them which will be those of Europe. Let us form a political commission, a defense commission and a cultural commission, just as we already have an economic commission in Brussels which studies common questions and which prepares the decisions of the six Governments. Naturally, the political committee and the others will proceed, in this respect, under conditions specific to the particular fields which will be theirs. In addition, the ministers responsible for these various points of view will meet whenever necessary to jointly apply the decisions which will have been taken by the Council. Finally, we have a European Parliamentary Assembly which sits in Strasbourg and which is made up of delegations from our six national parliaments. Let us put this Assembly in a position to discuss common political questions as it already discusses economic questions. After experience, we will see in three years how we can strengthen our ties. But, at the very least, we will have started to get used to living and acting together. This is what France has proposed. She believes this is the most practical thing that can be done.

Interview Michel Droit with Charles De Gaulle | June 7, 1968 | Video

Blames the call for democratization by student protestors as part of a communist plot.

Inheritance

Fin officielle de l'opération militaire française « Barkhane » au Sahel, après presque dix ans d'existence

Photo's explosion Nord Stream 1 and 2

An event which sealed European future dependance on America as a mere vassal state doing its proxy war vis-à-vis Russia and China.

Display:
Pierre Mendès France was Prime Minister for eight months from 1954 to 1955.

In that time he managed to decolonise "French" Indochina and Tunisia.

Had he not been stabbed in the back by his own parliamentary majority, who knows what he might have achieved? The deadline being May 1958 (De Gaulle's coup d'état), which might even have happened earlier, had he had the time to engage the decolonisation of Algeria, for example...

It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II

by eurogreen on Thu Nov 10th, 2022 at 01:56:03 PM EST
German philosopher Georg Hegel said that history evolves in dialectical ways, with successive phases of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. This framework fits well with where we stand today

In the heady days of 1989, with communism collapsing and the Cold War seemingly over, the political theorist Francis Fukuyama declared that we were witnessing the "end of history" which had culminated in the triumph of liberal democracy and the free market.

Fukuyama was drawing on the ideas of German philosopher Georg Hegel, but of course, history didn't come to an end, and, as recent events have shown, the Cold War was just sleeping, not dead.

Now, following the political convulsions of 2016, we're at a very different turning point, which many are trying to make sense of. I want to suggest that we can again usefully turn to Hegel, but this time to his idea that history evolves in dialectical ways, with successive phases of thesis, antithesis and synthesis.

Hegel implied that we should see history, and progress, not as a straight line but rather as a zigzag, shaped by the ways in which people bump into barriers, or face disappointments, and then readjust their course

This framework fits well with where we stand today. The `thesis' that has dominated mainstream politics for the last generation - and continues to be articulated shrilly by many proponents - is the claim that the combination of globalisation, technological progress and liberalisation empowers the great majority.

The antithesis, which, in part, fuelled the votes for Brexit and Trump, as well as the rise of populist parties and populist authoritarian leaders in Europe and beyond, is the argument that this technocratic combination merely empowers a minority and disempowers the majority of citizens.

The terms thesis, antithesis, and synthesis were coined by German philosopher Johann Fichte.

'Sapere aude'

by Oui (Oui) on Thu Nov 10th, 2022 at 03:08:43 PM EST
The Iraq war opened a fratricidal split among United States neo-conservatives. Danny Postel examines the bitter dispute between two leading neocons, Francis Fukuyama and Charles Krauthammer, and suggests that Fukuyama's critique of the Iraq war and decision not to vote for George W Bush is a significant political as well as intellectual moment.

Fukuyama's Moment: A Neocon Schism Opens | Open Democracy - 2006 |

Over the last two years, the term "neo-conservative" has come into sharper focus than at any other point in its roughly thirty-year history. The neo-conservative movement has exerted greater influence on United States foreign policy since 9/11 than it was ever previously able to do, the Iraq war being its crowning achievement.

Coinciding with this ascendancy has been an unrelenting stream of criticism directed at neo-conservatism, from virtually every square on the ideological chessboard. Such sorties have become something of a rallying-cry among much of the left. Neo-conservatives either ignore left-wing criticism (a luxury they can well afford) or else chew it up and spit it out: the more vitriolic it is, the more emboldened it makes them.

Some of the most savage reprisals against the neocons, however, have come from the right. I have written elsewhere of the ensemble of realists, libertarians, and "paleoconservatives" who opposed the Iraq adventure and the doctrines that justified it, and of other conservatives who fear that the neocons and their war will sink Bush's presidency.

Neo-conservatives are no less sanguine about attacks from this political direction: as if to say "bring it on", neocons are armed with counterattacks about the variously amoral, isolationist, nativist, unpatriotic, even anti-Semitic nature of the conservative cases against them.

So we got Trump instead of Hillary, succeeded by old man Joe. Far-right extremism and white-supremacy has taken a solid foothold from where there is no turning back. I have called it the rebirth of American fascism one hundred years later.

'Sapere aude'

by Oui (Oui) on Thu Nov 10th, 2022 at 03:12:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Liberalism and Its Discontents by Francis Fukuyama review - a defence of liberalism... from a former neocon

Unfortunately, today's leaders fail to learn of past mistakes. Joe Biden has been at the forefront of US foreign policy for over half a century. Lived the Cold War and the reset to confront a new Russia. Joe was for the Iraq War, enabled the hostilities to overthrow leaders in Libya, Egypt and Syria. His DNA is similar to GWB, Cheney, Rumsfeld, McCain and most war hawks, warmongers and short-sighted officials. I dare not use the term leader. The European Union has been under attack by America ever since 9/11, forcing EU expansion with new membership to NATO. Dividing Europe into Old and New Europe, Trump had no plan except as a businessman Europe should buy more America made weapons and up its defense budget to 2% GDP. MAGA

Biden and his NSC team expanded on Trump policy. The backlash is coming and it ain't pretty.

'Sapere aude'

by Oui (Oui) on Thu Nov 10th, 2022 at 03:16:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]
De Gaulle may have been fact-based in certain respects, but his vision was really based on Ideal France, rather like the Roman Catholic doctrine that the church would still exist even if all the members suddenly vanished, and he behaved as if he wished that would happen so he could get on with his vision of Ideal France without the inconvenient fact of the French citizenry.
by rifek on Sat Nov 12th, 2022 at 08:23:05 PM EST
It's simpler than that. He was a conservative (borderline fascist in his youth). He was the arbiter of the formation of modern France in the late 40s, but the impetus for the welfare state, male/female equality and all the rest came from the left, they were not really his bag. When he reshaped the republic as an elective monarchy, he effectively rehabilitated the right (which had been marginalised through the 1950s because of its collaboration with the Nazis).

So nominally freeing the colonies, while continuing to pull the strings and to exploit them economically, was the obvious path once he led the right back to power.

It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II

by eurogreen on Sun Nov 13th, 2022 at 05:07:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]
De Gaulle maneuvered through turbulent years in post-war Europe. He too had rightwing, fascist generals he managed to control. Hardship for all emigres returning from Algeria ... the follow-up was difficult to manage and social problems endure.

The gains of post-war Europe, the role the EEC and EU solidified an opportunity of peace. All has been destroyed in a decade by US aggression through NATO. Sad, beyond point of no-return.

"The ultimate goal of the Atlantic nations should be to develop
a genuine Atlantic commonwealth, in which common institutions
are increasingly developed to address common problems."

Dean Acheson, 1961 Report to President Kennedy

"When all is said and done, Great Britain is an island;
France the cape of a continent; America another world."

Charles de Gaulle, War Memoirs

Atlantis lost : the American experience with De Gaulle, 1958-1969

Chapter1. Organizing the West: Eisenhower, Kennedy, and de Gaulle's `Tripartite' Memorandum Proposal, 1958-1962.

'Sapere aude'

by Oui (Oui) on Sun Nov 13th, 2022 at 06:10:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

Top Diaries