851.5045/10–548: Telegram
The Ambassador in France (Caffery) to the Secretary of State
[Received October 10—10:12 p. m.]
5220. While prospects for the success or failure of the coal strike cannot yet be accurately assessed, it has been timed to take place not only at a moment of grave international tension but also, insofar as France is concerned, at the lowest point in national morale in the last [Page 663] two years. The dream of the third force, around which the great body of the middle-of-road Frenchmen could group themselves and find escape from foreign dictatorship of the Communists and the feared dictatorship of General De Gaulle, has disappeared in the series of meaningless and wasteful parliamentary crises since July, and with it confidence in the parliamentary system, if not in democratic processes themselves.
The tense international situation in which many Frenchmen see themselves as helpless pawns in an impending conflict between the Russian and American juggernauts contributes to the prevailing lack of confidence and encourages a fatalistic nothingness in non-Communist and non-Gaullist elements. Such little cohesiveness as existed between the non-Communist groups is now fast disappearing, and the elements of disintegration are gaining ground in the whole middle sector of French life. As a class, only the peasants feel that they are well off, but their suspicion of the future is such that they withhold much of their produce against rising prices or invest their profits in gold.
That this situation should occur at the moment of greatest prosperity and highest production indicates [indexes?] that France has known since the liberation is not only ironic in itself but, because this recovery has been made possible in great part by ERP, it is most disturbing to Americans.
One of the basic causes of the present situation, apart from the purely economic or political causes, which are known to the Department through the Embassy reports, is that the traditional social problem of France is as far from the solution as ever. Industrial and white-collar workers, whatever their political affiliation, are united in the conviction that they are not receiving their fair share of French economic recovery made possible by ERP. While the success or failure of the coal strike will show whether or not there is broad basis for large-scale industrial strife in the immediate future, there is real evidence that the trend which resulted in the split between Communist and non-Communist labor unions (the capital event of postwar France) has come to a stop and may be reversed and replaced by a trend toward unity, in which the superior organization of the Communists would prevail.
The middle classes, particularly those whose incomes are derived from industry and commerce and the liberal professions, after having recovered from their fear of complete socialization immediately after the liberation, took advantage of their heavy representation in the coalition governments which followed the retreat of the Communist Party into the opposition to regain their prewar position in the distribution of the national income. These elements now fear that position is threatened by the Queuille tax program and the projected fiscal [Page 664] reform and may be expected to exert every ounce of influence to prevent their realization. The respite [from] attacks on its life which the parliamentary recess gave the Queuille Government will last only 6 weeks more, during which it must perform the Herculean task of controlling inflation and bringing about some measure of economic stabilization before it meets a Parliament which has been rubbing shoulders with discontented and dissatisfied constituents. Even before the coal strike was announced, it was far from certain that before Parliament reconvened the recent wage increases would not already have been compensated by price rises neutralizing any gain in real wages for the workers.
At this disconcerting juncture in French life, the only dynamic rallying point offered non-Communists is General De Gaulle and his RPF, but the harsh and uncompromising tones of the General’s recent press conference again making clear he will return only on his own terms contributed no harmonious note to the prevailing discord. His lack of a concrete program is disturbing enough in itself because of his disparate and uncertain entourage and his lack of real understanding of the relative importance to be accorded the different elements in a modern industrial state. This lack is most evident and most disturbing in his policy toward labor. At this time of social conflict he not only promises the French workmen longer hours but confirms their fears that his return will cost them their freedom to organize. This blind spot in General De Gaulle is, of course, being actively exploited be the Communists, who see in it an opportunity to recapture the non-Communist elements whom they lost a year ago. It is providing a strong impetus toward the trend to labor unity which has been noted above.
It is for this reason that many observers here believe that the Communists wish General De Gaulle to come to power, in the belief that his return would reunite the proletariat under Communist leadership even at the cost of a civil war which the proletariat might lose. Such civil strife would in any case serve to achieve the Communists principal short term target, the disruption of ERP and Western Union.
Repeated London 1027.