Warnings from the 20th Century
“In the short term, dictatorships sometimes achieve great things. But they always finish badly, because, to make the weight of constraint and moral oppression bearable, they are soon forced to drag the country into exaggerated enterprises.” This was Charles de Gaulle’s opinion, spoken in the late-1940s, after he led the Free French, before he was president of France. It’s quoted in The Last Titans: How Churchill and de Gaulle Saved Their Nations and Transformed the World, an absorbing new dual-biography by historian Richard Vinen.
“Exaggerated enterprises” seem to be a tendency of not just dictators but also elected leaders pushing in the direction of autocracy. Going to war without seeking congressional authorization or making a case to the public—or preparing for the enemy’s ability to shut down a strategic waterway off its coast—would be such an enterprise, fueled by some combination of hubris and desire to distract from domestic failings and scandals.
De Gaulle thought a leader should cultivate an air of dignity and remoteness; a head of state spouting vulgarities on social media, and dancing on TV, would’ve disgusted him. Moreover, he wasn’t aligned with the proposition that “He who saves his country does not violate any law,” in that he responded to the late-1950s Algeria crisis, where he faced down would-be mutineers and assassins, by fostering a new constitution, ensuring that he and his successors, as presidents of France, though powerful, would still be subject to the rule of law and the will of the voters. A belief stated by one British general during World War II, that de Gaulle sought to impose a dictatorship, was wrong, both then and later.
Vinen, a professor at King’s College London, draws a contrast between de Gaulle’s personality and Churchill’s, writing that the latter “knew himself to be exceptional and took it for granted that he would be the centre of attention. Extraordinary though this may sound, Charles de Gaulle’s defining characteristic was modesty. He stood on his dignity when he represented France but made no great claims about himself as an individual.” Churchill recalled feeling he was “walking with destiny” when he became prime minister, unlike de Gaulle’s description of his own later return to power: “So be it! In spite of the difficulties that I faced in myself: my age—sixty-seven—the lacunae in my knowledge and the limits of my capacities… I would, to serve her [France], personify this great national ambition.”
They differed, also, in their stances toward the US. Churchill emphasized keeping London and Washington aligned, an aspiration he expressed even before World War I. During World War II, de Gaulle irritated Franklin Roosevelt, who regarded him as a prima donna. As president of France, de Gaulle sought distance from the US, pulling his country out of NATO’s command structure, building third-world relationships, and recognizing Mao’s China. The press release for Vinen’s book astutely notes about the present: “The United States no longer seems the natural ally of western Europe—a development that would have broken Churchill’s heart and aroused wry amusement on the part of de Gaulle.”
The Coming Storm: Power, Conflict, and Warnings from History, by Odd Arne Westad, a professor of history and global affairs at Yale, is “a book about the most important issue of our own time, the question of war and peace,” its author writes. Westad notes that only half of one percent of the current world population has experienced “Great Power war,” as the last was World War II. “And although many more have suffered the devastating consequences of other kinds of warfare, most people who are of age today have grown up in relatively stable worlds that were presided over by either one or two Superpowers. These worlds were not peaceful, but they were to some extent predictable.”
By contrast, the world now is “entering a phase where multiple Great Powers jostle for supremacy within regions and within human endeavors such as nuclear technology, artificial intelligence, or space exploration.” China has emerged as a peer rival of the US, and other countries such as India, Brazil and Turkey have formidable militaries. To analyze the risks of war in such a world, Westad draws on the situation before World War I, when Germany emerged as a rival to Great Britain, and other powers held great sway.
Westad: “Back then we also had a world of many Great Powers that clashed with one another and sought to dominate their neighborhoods. Nationalism and populism were on the rise, and many people felt the globalization of the day had not worked for them. Protectionism and tariffs increased, and growing numbers blamed the citizens of other countries for their problems. Immigration and terrorism were among the big issues.”
It was sobering, but edifying, to read these books during a US-launched war led with extraordinary incompetence, a world-historical blunder that will echo through history.