Quebec demi-libre
Sam White
Paris It is ironic that a speech made ten years ago by General de Gaulle which marked the beginning of his political decline should now have as a consequence the triumphal reception as a head of state of the prime minister of a Canadian province, M Rene Levesque of Quebec. It is even more ironic that the man who is bestowing these honours on him, President Giscard d'Estaing, was at the time the sharpest critic of de Gaulle's speech with its now famous concluding cry: Wive le Quebec fibre.' Yet this is what happened in Paris last week during M Levesque's three-day state visit while Ottawa gnashed its teeth in helpless fury as insult was piled on insult and snub on snub. The ultimate snub came towards the end of the visit when M Levesque accepted without reference to Ottawa, and thereby contrary ,to Canadian law, one of the highest orders in the French Legion of Honour from the President of the Republic.
'We are with you all the way whichever way you choose,' was Giscard's concluding message to M Levesque. The way M Levesque has apparently chosen is to take Quebec step by step out of the Canadian federation and establish it as an independent state by referendum to be held in that province alone in early 1979. Considering that the outcome of such a referendum is uncertain and that M Levesque and his party did not fight and win the Quebec elections on the independence' issue, he took the honours and tributes that were showered on him during his Paris visit with all the aplomb of someone who was already the head of state of an independent nation. His cockiness was best expressed by his greeting to the Canadian Ambassador in Paris, Mr Pelletier, at a reception at the Elysee Palace. 'Hallo, cry-baby', he said to him in English. It is interesting to contrast all this with the mood that reigned in Paris after de Gaulle's Montreal speech. Then faces were red everywhere at what was considered a monumental gaffe by de Gaulle and one which clearly indicated that the General was becoming gaga. Prime Minister Pompidou did his best to put a brave face on it and there were rumblings of revolt inside the government.
Official spokesmen fell over themselves in explaining off the record that de Gaulle had been overcome by the size and enthusiasm of the crowds which greeted him. A few days after his return to Paris an unprecedented thing happened and a communiqué was issued putting an official gloss on de Gaulle's outburst. This indicated that by 'Free Quebec' • de Gaulle •did not necessarily mean an independent Quebec. It could also mean a Quebec which, having freed itself from its feudal past, would enjoy a greater degree of autonomy and greater influence within the Federation. It was also pointed out that de Gaulle had never used the word 'independence' in his speech and that he had ended it not only with Wive le Quebec libre' but also with Wive le Canada.' It should be noted that French concern with Quebec and the alleged semi' colonial status it has within the Federation is as recent as de Gaulle's visit to the province. Before then Quebec might have been on another planet for all the interest that Paris showed in it. And this indifference was even more heartily reciprocated by the Quebecois.
For the French, Quebec was a priestridden backwater and for the Quebecois, France was not only the mother country which had deserted them but with a predominantly anti-Christian culture hostile to their own. This mutual indifference and even hostility became most apparent during the war when Quebec insofar as it was interested in France's fate was overwhelmingly Petainist in sentiment. It is very much to de Gaulle's credit that he was one of the first to realise the dramatic changes that had taken place in the province since the war and the possibilities these offered to France. Here, however, is the nub of the question —what possibilities? It is safe to say that de Gaulle thought of the problem in emotional or sentimental terms. Here, to him, was a great opportunity to bridge an alienation of more than two hundred years between the first and the second biggest conglomeration of French-speaking communities.
I do not think he ever spared a thought for the commercial possibilities involved, which are in fact minimal. There is no way in which France can help redress Quebec's dependence on Anglo-Saxon Canada or on the United States. Quebec can of course nationalise its mining resources, but even so the capital for their development is much more likely to come from the major finan cial houses in Canada and the United States than from France. The net result is likely to be a cultural and political reinforcement of France's relations with Quebec than an economic one. The question then arises why Giscard went out of his way to receive Levesque as he did. The answer seems to be that he really did not have much choice in the matter. I do not believe that electoral considerations were uppermost in his mind, if only because if appeasing the Gaullists were his principal preoccupation, then he could have done so on much more minor issues on which he has held firm. In any case, the question of Quebec does not generate that much electoral fire in France as to warrant a specially ostentatious welcome to its Premier. I repeat Giscard had no choice in the matter. Between the time when de Gaulle set in motion cooperation with Quebec and the present day the French commitment to support Quebec had become a matter of honour. There was no escaping without the risk of a second rupture between France and Quebec, this time an irreparable one. Sentiment as well as pride, a renewal of a relationship between metropolitan France and its long-lost colony in North America, made this unthinkable. Although, as I have said, electoral interest in Quebec in France is minimal, recriminations coming from Quebec would have proved a serious embarrassment. There was nothing much more than moral support that France could offer Quebec and this moral support could not be a carefully measured out one, it had to be total.
Levesque is not a firebrand. He is in fact a respected establishment figure, well viewed by the banking community on both sides of the frontier dividing Canada from the US. He is the best protection that Quebec has against extremism. The role of Paris in this situation is to do nothing which makes it appear that a possible independent Quebec is a pipe dream. Short of that it must strengthen Levesque's hand in his negotiations with Ottawa safe in the knowledge that no irreparable damage to the Federation will be done. It is in fact no gamble — it is a certitude which both Levesque and Trudeau understand full well. The concrete results of M. Levesque's visit have been almost pathetically meagre, its political results will be inevitably considerable. They will lead not to independence but to a change in the Canadian Constitution giving Quebec greater autonomy. It is significant that during his visit M Levesque never once used the word 'independence'. It is a restructured Canada, not a fractured one, that both Quebec and Paris are after.
Previous page
