Chapter 4 3. Charles de Gaulle-1

The Mystery of Leadership On November 12, 1970, more world leaders gathered in Paris than ever before, even when the city was the center of a globe-spanning empire.Three days ago, less than two weeks before his eightieth birthday, Charles-André Joseph Marie de Gaulle passed away suddenly.Now, sixty-three current and former heads of state and government leaders who came to mourn de Gaulle walked silently through the 260-foot-long porch of Notre Dame Cathedral.As President of the United States, I was part of it, but I also attended the funeral as a friend. We are not here simply to attend his funeral, but to show our respect for him.A few years ago, he left strict last words for his funeral: no grand ceremony, no heavily armed soldiers escorting the coffin, no VIPs invited, just the small church in the village of Colombesou In the cemetery, a simple private ceremony was held.In accordance with his wishes, he was buried in an ordinary oak coffin worth seventy-two dollars, and carried to the cemetery by some of his countrymen—a butcher clerk, a cheese shop keeper, and a farm hand, Buried next to the tomb of his beloved daughter Anne.Anne was born with mental retardation and died twelve years ago, when she was nineteen.According to de Gaulle's wishes during his lifetime, only the words "Charles de Gaulle 1890-1970" are inscribed on the tombstone.

The massive memorial service at Notre-Dame was not de Gaulle's idea, it was an accommodation by the government for people throughout France and the world who wanted to pay tribute to de Gaulle. If you ask a person what impresses him the most about de Gaulle, he may say "tall", or "severe", or "difficult to get along with", or "strong-willed", maybe he may say de Gaulle Associated with the French word for "great".Had he been an older man, perhaps he would have recalled that he was a leading "fighting Frenchman" under the banner of the double cross of Lorraine in World War II, or perhaps It is recalled that the legend is Churchill's comment afterwards that "among the crosses I have carried, the heaviest is the Cross of Lorraine".

When I think of Charles de Gaulle, all these kiosks come to mind.I recall him as an exceptionally kind, courteous and considerate man.I feel the same way about it, both in office and in office.For a man like him, even if I disagree with his opinions, he always respects them with the utmost respect. What was it about de Gaulle that left such a deep impression on us?Why can he become a rare big man in the twentieth century, so much higher than the leaders of many countries stronger than France? We commemorate leaders not only for what they did, but for who they were; not only for their contributions, but also for their character.While others have contributed more than de Gaulle, few have had his strength of character.He is a stubborn, willful, self-confident man, extremely egoistic, but at the same time an extremely selfless person, and he wants what he wants, not for himself, but for France.His life is simple and his ideals are lofty. Like an actor, he plays a role he created himself, and this role is only suitable for an actor to play.And he also shapes himself so that he can adapt himself to this role.He created de Gaulle, the civil servant—France personified.

Charles de Gaulle may have been an incredible man - and that was the result of his will.Yet he was also a veritable hero, one of the most remarkable figures of the twentieth century.For France, he is one of the pinnacle figures of all time, as complex, strong and elusive as the recipe of French fine wine.His character, like fine wine, has stood the test of time. I first met de Gaulle on a state visit to Washington in 1960, two years after he returned to power.Over the years, I have had many fixed opinions about him: he has long been a favorite hunt for a particular form of vulnerable cynicism.Washington society scrambled to grandstand with such taunts.Just as his image is suitable for caricature satire, so de Gaulle's behavior is often fodder for verbal satire.De Gaulle was a natural target for those who liked to exalt themselves by beating others up.

Before I met de Gaulle, I had a clear impression of him: indifferent, narrow-minded, arrogant, intolerably self-righteous, and it was almost impossible to deal with him.Churchill's remark on the Cross of Lorraine has had a great effect on my impression of him--from this it can be seen how fatally a simple sentence can do to a prominent man, making an impression almost People cannot be obliterated.Alice Roosevelt Longworth's portrayal of Thomas E. Dewey as "the groom on the wedding cake" had similar consequences.Some people even believe that the illusion created by this description actually caused him to lose in the 1948 election.If Dewey's opponents at the time had used adjectives to describe him as narrow-minded, pompous, manipulative, and affectation, it would have done less than that simple sentence.

When I visited France as a member of Congress in 1947, my negative opinion of de Gaulle was reinforced by almost every French and American official I met.They dismissed him, calling him a deranged extremist who would never hold power again. My mind is also influenced by the almost open contempt for de Gaulle that my country's diplomats hold.Even Charles Pollan—one of America's most able career diplomats, who served as U.S. ambassador abroad under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson—seldom concealed his distaste for the French president.President Roosevelt's ambassador to France, William Bullitt, told me that at dinners at his embassy Pollan used to speak of de Gaulle with relentless wit and imitate his speech and manner , making the guests laugh out loud.De Gaulle heard that Pollan didn't like him, and he also responded to Pollan.Many people think that de Gaulle had an anti-American bias, but I have often felt that this personal attack partly explains his policies.

Shortly before I met de Gaulle for the first time in 1960, I had what was actually a cramming lesson on his background material.The more I learned about him, the more I felt that old stereotypes were disappearing.I know, he was as brave as MacArthur in the war.He warned the people of the potential crisis in advance.I was also deeply impressed by the fact that, like Churchill, he had already written many articles on a wide range of topics and outstanding literary talents before entering the top leadership; —Being snubbed and losing his job.He used these years to work on some of his best books.

During the Second World War, de Gaulle was like MacArthur, Churchill, Eisenhower and other great figures in the world. Their image in my mind is much taller than they actually are, but they are so far away from me.When I was a young junior naval officer, sitting on an island in the Pacific, reading curt news reports about this wayward leader of the "Fighting French," I never imagined that sixteen years later I would I would have welcomed him in Washington, not to mention that, twenty-five years later, he and I would be sitting side by side in Paris as Presidents of France and the United States.

When I first met de Gaulle in 1960, I was immediately impressed by his appearance.I knew he was tall--at six feet four, the tallest general in the French army--but his soldierly bearing made his stature all the more impressive.It was only later that I noticed that he was slightly hunched. During his visits to America, I noticed that his movements were graceful for his size, never clumsy or clumsy—whether in gesture, or in walking, or in handling the silverware.He had a quiet, impressive demeanor, with a certain old-fashioned air of grandeur. The de Gaulle I met in 1960 was a far cry from the haughty, domineering personality portrayed by journalists and diplomats.I found him to be a very nice man, somewhat indescribably shy.He wasn't enthusiastic, but he wasn't a stern guy either.I would say he was almost refined.But, as with most leaders, polite manners are one thing and policies quite another.

Most leaders I know have gentleness in their nature, but it would be a mistake to call them gentlemen for that reason.People who are truly refined are seldom good at exercising power.A leader sometimes has to be tough to the point of brutality in order to accomplish his mission.If he is too irritated because the work is difficult, if he is too much bound by tenderness, then the right thing to do well will not be done well, or even not done at all. As I have learned more about de Gaulle over the years, I have gradually developed a deep respect for him as a leader or for him personally.He and I both seem to feel the same way about each other. In 1967 my friend Vermon Walters, who had known de Gaulle since 1942, went to Paris to serve as military attache at the American embassy.After a farewell lunch for Ambassador Pollan, de Gaulle summoned Walters and asked if he had seen me lately.Walters replied that he had.He then said emphatically that he believed I was going to be elected president, adding that he and I had "passed the wilderness" -- a phrase he often used to describe the years when he lost power.Then he uttered another sentence, which Walters found incredulously to be a prophecy: "Mr. Nixon, like me, lives in exile in his own country."

De Gaulle was a figure of the twentieth century, but he was also of the nineteenth.He led France forward and backward.The continuation of French history and the French past can be seen throughout his career.From his name itself - Charles de Gaulle can hear echoes in Charmagne and Gaul - great, glorious, sublime - the French word grandeur, when used in de Gaulle's articles or speeches, sometimes The translator uses these meanings to express. In his opinion, this word is indispensable for a country, especially for France. If de Gaulle can be said to be a historical figure, it is not accidental, but he was determined to do so.He devoted his life to making history take shape in the pattern he imagined.As one critic wrote, "For de Gaulle, politics was not first and foremost the art of the possible; it was the art of the will." For de Gaulle, the will was the main motor of the state.He has a high degree of confidence in his ability to forge history with his will. He also felt the need to make French resolve great.He consistently calls upon his people to climb "mountains," though these "peaks" are only faintly visible or indistinct.For de Gaulle, the important thing is to let the people feel that they are climbing. Only in this way can this country become great.He once said: "France can only show her true colors when she is engaged in a great cause." He regards himself as the embodiment of France, and his responsibility is to inspire the spirit of France. As a person, de Gaulle is alluring, not only because of his historical importance, but also because he teaches us what it takes to be a leader and how to lead with extraordinary insight.Few can match him in analyzing a problem convincingly or writing with such thoroughness. Few can be as clear about his methods as he is, and yet few can be as clear in his articulation. Finally, the fog that enveloped him did not dissipate.And he always manages to wrap himself in this fog of mystery even when he explains how he does it.He is a master of fantasy.He is as versatile a magician as a skilled visionary.Seems to do the impossible and often accomplishes the improbable. In a way - and this is rare for most great leaders - the key to demystifying Charles de Gaulle is to be found in his writings - not only in his expressive literature and thoughtful found in his memoirs, but also in the analytical works of his early years. Long before he first rose to prominence and went on to power, he wrote what amounted to a leadership guidebook, Les Blades, originally as lecture notes at the French Military Academy and later published in 1932. Break through the complicated situation and capture the essence.Only then can the intellect elaborate, shape and refine the so-called "raw material" obtained from the objective. He argues that only when a leader maintains the right balance between reason and intuition can the decisions he makes be prescient. Foresight, that is, knowing where to lead, is the core of the leadership art of a great leader.The word leader implies the ability to act as a guide, to look beyond the present in charting a voyage into the future.When I visited France in 1969, de Gaulle said to me: "I want to make policy for the newspapers of the day after tomorrow." Most leaders get caught up in the headlines of the day's newspapers and the pressure of the moment, and as a result lose sight of the long-term prospects However, de Gaulle does not live for the "moment", he is the one who uses the "moment". Long before de Gaulle became famous, he displayed a genius for seeing things better than his contemporaries.In fact, he was largely alone in the debates against the Maginot Line, in the decision against capitulation to Hitler, and against the hasty patchwork of the Fourth Republic's political system.On all of these issues, however, he has been proven correct. In 1934, de Gaulle outlined his theories on the nature of modern warfare in a book called The Army of the Future.He argues that, thanks to a technological revolution: the invention of the internal combustion engine, that pre-planned strategy has become obsolete.He wrote: "Machine controls our destiny." All kinds of machines change all areas of life, and war is no exception.The real beginning.Not many French people saw this at the time.He flew to England, determined to continue the resistance, even if his government was unwilling to do so.He insisted: "France has lost a battle, but not the war." In his first radio appeal from London, de Gaulle declared that France was not alone, as fighting in France had ignited another World War. He said that the French colonies, backed by British naval superiority and the vast latent capabilities of the United States in munitions production, could carry the war on and win it.That kind of foresight made de Gaulle live forever in the hearts of the French people, and made it possible for him to become the guardian of the eternal flame of the French soul in that extremely dark age. After the war, de Gaulle's hopes for France were shattered on the boulder of "political stability".Although the French hailed de Gaulle as messiah, they ignored his proposals for various constitutional changes, thus enabling pre-war politicians and parties to force him out. De Gaulle opposed the restoration of the parliamentary system of the Third Republic because he believed that it was to blame for the fiasco of 1940 due to an unsound military policy. There were so many political parties at that time, but none of them could get a majority to formulate a reasonable military policy.The rowdy meeting, like the state of nature described by Hobbes, is a melee of all against all.De Gaulle warned that if parliamentarism were restored, a parliamentary government would produce only a series of extremely weak coalition cabinets.These cabinets fall at the slightest political shock.As he said many years later: "Parliamentaries only paralyze action, they cannot initiate action." De Gaulle knew that France was essentially a Latin nation.Luis Munaz, one-time Governor of Puerto Rico.When Marin talked about his Latin heritage, he once told me: "I am proud of my Latin heritage. Our loyalty to family, church, and contributions to philosophy, music, and art are enviable. But our Latin Nations are just bad at politics. We find it difficult to strike a balance between order and liberty. We go to extremes—either order with more liberty and little liberty, or liberty with too little order.” The genius of de Gaulle was that he had Capability maintains a delicate balance between the two in France. Because de Gaulle opposed a return to "partisan power" after World War II, many left-wing journalists and politicians accused him of seeking to establish an autocracy.They were wrong about him.During and at the beginning of the French liberation struggle there was indeed a need for what de Gaulle called "a certain monarchy".When circumstances permitted, he allowed people to choose their own government without delay.He never challenged the principle that dominion belongs to the people.But he believes that consensus leadership is no leadership, and that the president or prime minister must lead the parliament and not follow it. In late 1945, de Gaulle realized he had lost the debate. The Constitution of the Fourth Republic established a legislature with unlimited powers controlling a weak executive.He was a firm believer in resigning from government and "getting out of things before they throw you off".After calling a cabinet meeting and announcing his decision to resign, he strode out of the room abruptly and withdrew. He was convinced that the time would come when France called him to lead, but on his own terms.Once again de Gaulle showed his foresight, and his time finally came. He has a sense of destiny and doesn't want to be president for the sake of being president.Only if he feels that he alone can deliver the leadership the country needs will he be willing to be president.In political activities, the difference between adulthood and childhood is that childhood wants to be high to get ahead; while adults want to be high is to do a career.De Gaulle wanted power, not for what it could do for him, but for what he could do with it. Less than a year and a half after relinquishing power, de Gaulle launched an imposing campaign to regain it.He transforms his personality in order to be the master of great events.Now he watched with disdain as others clumsily handled small things. Impatient to wait any longer for France to recall him, he launched a political campaign, founded the League of the People of France, and reemerged himself in politics. In 1947, the dark clouds of the Cold War had just appeared on the horizon, and the French people were suffering from lack of supplies, low wages, and high prices.De Gaulle did not care about the trivialities of their lives.He said he had not liberated France to "worry about rationing macaroni" but rather to focus on issues of global power and declare French greatness. In those tumultuous years, de Gaulle, often referred to by the French as "the man in the storm," saw his political stocks rise dramatically. In 1951, the RPF won more seats in parliament than any other party.From the outset de Gaulle forbade his representatives to support any government, an order which had the peculiar effect of bringing the RPF into a de facto alliance with the Communist Party. Several centrist governments have stepped down one after another due to stubborn opposition from both the left and the right.But despite all the circumstances, by the early 1950s they succeeded with little effort in improving the domestic and international situation.In fact, the politicians of the Fourth Republic took credit for the "man of the storm".De Gaulle also seemed to admit: "The government of the Republic is not good at governing France, but it defends itself well." - this is what de Gaulle said to the visitors in his disappointment. By 1952 it was clearly impossible for the RPF to bring down the Fourth Republic.Party discipline broke down after de Gaulle ordered his deputies to reject an invitation to form a government.By 1953, the number of defectors to the alliance was increasing, and the French people's alliance was weak in parliament.In the next few city council elections, due to the bleak situation, de Gaulle left the movement. This long episode of the RPF proves that a smart leader doesn't have to be infallible.De Gaulle saw far into the future, but sometimes reality fooled him.Sometimes he has an instinctive feeling of awe for his people.At other times, he doesn't pay attention to the mood of the people, as the failure of his party is a case in point.His criticism of parliamentary regimes would prove prophetic.But the time was not right, and his efforts to fulfill the prophecy had disastrous consequences. The crisis that caused de Gaulle to return to power originated in the second half of 1954, when some Muslims in Algeria formed the National Liberation Front and began to wage guerrilla warfare against the French colonial authorities.The war dragged on for years, and as it faltered, the ferocity of the French army grew.The politicians of the Fourth Republic showed that war was peace, and that they themselves were incapable of ending the war. In 1958, the regime's inability to solve the problems it encountered in Algeria led to a crisis of government.Especially after the army suffered the humiliation of defeat in Indochina in 1954, the French army has made up its mind to make French Algeria still belong to France at all costs.Gaullists, right-wing politicians and French colonialists in Algeria have sided with the military in a loose coalition against the French government, ready to act if it fails. When the Algerian question came to a head, the Fourth Republic was in the midst of its twenty-fourth cabinet crisis since de Gaulle's resignation in 1946, and there had been almost a month of anarchy.A mob stormed a government building in Algeria as local security forces watched quietly.Under the pretext of re-establishing order, the generals overthrew the French-Algerian government.Less than two weeks later, the troops stationed on Corsica joined the rebel general.The Algerian generals were going to go ahead and conquer suzerain France in a few days, but the government was powerless to stop them. Throughout the incident, de Gaulle showed political wisdom.He has refused to condemn or publicly endorse the military coup, even though some of those involved were his supporters.His silence will help everyone listen to him when he finally announces that he is "ready to take over the power of the republic".He had watched the politicians of the Fourth Republic exhaust all their means, and when they finally turned to him for advice, they could cooperate on his terms. Although the government complied with his terms, none of which made him a dictator, many French people continued to look at him with suspicion.Biographer Brian Crozier writes: After hearing the terms of de Gaulle's return to power, the Speaker of the National Assembly, André le Troquer, shouted at him: "All this is unconstitutional, starting from the events in Algeria From now on, I will know you well. You have the soul of a dictator, and you love personal power too much!" De Gaulle replied sternly: "It was I who saved the Republic, Monsieur Troquel." By the time de Gaulle took over, the government of the Fourth Republic had fallen apart and was in such a pitiful state.It would be wrong to say that de Gaulle came to power through a coup. He was merely a merciful blow to spare a dying regime from suffering. De Gaulle asked the Fourth Republic to grant him the power to propose amendments to the constitution directly to the people in a referendum.Through these means he promulgated the Constitution of the Fifth Republic.Central to the Constitution is the presidency.The President is empowered to formulate and implement policy without undue interference from the National Assembly.This prevented the state of laissez-faire and paralysis that had brought the Fourth Republic to the brink of political, economic and social collapse. Some have criticized de Gaulle for giving the president so much power.But from the perspective of sober understanding in hindsight, I think the political stability brought by this constitution to France is de Gaulle's greatest legacy, just as the Napoleonic Code is Napoleon's greatest legacy. During my tenure as vice president, I always went to the airport to greet visiting prime ministers. Because according to the diplomatic etiquette at that time, President Wensenhower just went to the airport to welcome the head of state to be interviewed.In the years and months leading up to de Gaulle's return to power, I alternated almost every two months with a new French prime minister and a new Italian prime minister.Italy is still not free from political instability, but de Gaulle solved it in France.Any astute constitutionalist could probably devise a similar government structure.But only de Gaulle could both foresee the need for it and have the power to promulgate it. In Greek mythology, Apollo gave Cassandra the gift of foretelling the future, but later turned this gift into a curse on others by disbelieving those who heard her warnings.De Gaulle knew that foresight was not enough.A leader must not only decide correctly what to do, but also persuade others. to act.Every occupant of the White House who has felt Cassandra's curse at one time or another has faced the growing problem of not being able to push bureaucrats when they see that there is a right path to follow. Institutions, Congress, or the public move in that direction.In "The Blade", de Gaulle wrote: A leader "must be able to establish a spirit of trust in the hearts of those under him, he must be able to determine his authority". De Gaulle argued that authority comes from fame.And fame "in general is a feeling, suggestion and impression, etc., it depends first of all on having basic talent. And talent is a kind of innate wisdom that cannot be analyzed".This talent is rare.He wrote, "Certain persons have, and may even be said to be born with, this quality of exuberant authority, which is like a liquid, though it is impossible to say exactly what it consists of." This point is often expressed by the buzzword "charisma" these days, and it is still a quality that can be felt but cannot be expressed in words. In addition to this ineffable quality, de Gaulle wrote, a leader must possess three specific qualities: mystery, character, and gravitas. "Above all," he declared, "reputation is impossible without mystery. For intimacy breeds contempt. All religions have their shrines, and no one is a hero in the eyes of his valet." Leader There must always be something in his schemes and demeanor that inscrutable to others, something that confuses, impulsive, and captures their attention. I still vividly recall the eye-catching appearance of Charles de Gaulle when he came to Washington to attend the funeral of President Kennedy in November 1963.Mrs. Nixon and I watched the funeral procession from the window of a suite at the Mayflower Hotel where we were staying. Big shots and would-be big shots from all over the world walk behind the coffin.De Gaulle was not only imposing in stature, but he also seemed to surpass others in dignity, image and charisma. Whenever I met de Gaulle, whether in public or private, he displayed a refined, even dignified demeanor.His decisive demeanor makes him somewhat withdrawn.Some people say that this kind of decisiveness is self-righteous and self-righteous, but it is not the case with de Gaulle.The self-righteous and self-righteous nature is not born. In de Gaulle, his eccentricity is born.When he deals with heads of state, if he thinks that the other party is equal to his intelligence, he is calm and natural, but by no means informal, even with close friends. In this respect, de Gaulle was like every American president I knew before his inauguration in 1969, except Lyndon Johnson.Herbert Hoover, Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, and even Harry Truman all had a very strong tendency to stay out of the crowd and dislike being treated too close to others. Even at a young age, de Gaulle was estranged from his peers.His family joked that he must have been locked in a freezer as a baby because of his icy personality. He had nothing against other people doing this, but he felt that it would be out of character for him to do so.But at the same time, his personal demeanor was never that condescending, which is not uncommon for small people who occupy high positions. As a state figure, de Gaulle attracted a cadre of loyal supporters.But he kept a considerable distance from them, reflecting his own maxim: "There is no authority without fame, and fame is impossible without a certain distance." In his Élysée office, There were two telephones on a table near his desk, but they never rang. He regarded the telephone as an intolerable nuisance in modern times, and even his closest advisers would not dare to call directly. call him. Like MacArthur, de Gaulle had little patience for small talk.Every time I meet with him, it's clear he's always trying to turn the conversation on to serious issues.He is also like MacArthur in the accuracy of language. Whether it is in a press conference, in an extemporaneous speech, in answering a question, or even in an informal conversation, both of them use refined language, accurate Grasp the nuances of meaning. If these two men were in the United States Congress, the "Congress Record" into which their speeches were compiled would not require them to revise their speeches before they were printed. De Gaulle could not tolerate the incompetent. At an official banquet I hosted for him in 1960, the French Consul General in a major American city acted as his interpreter. When translating de Gaulle's toast, the interpreter trembled and flipped through the speech.I could see that de Gaulle was annoyed.Later, I learned that he dismissed the consul general and chose another to accompany him on the journey. De Gaulle never joined in the small talk.At cabinet meetings, he often listened intently to what his ministers had to say, taking careful notes.If he wants to exchange views with a minister, he usually arranges a private meeting. Decisions on major events were made by de Gaulle alone.He didn't think he was as smart as Solomon, but he did believe he had Solomon's judgment.For a problem, he often asks for "all the documents" first, and with his infinite ability to go into details, he clarifies everything he should know.Then send the consultant away, ponder alone, and come to a conclusion.He knew how important it was for a leader to have time to think.At his insistence, his staff set aside several hours each day for him to concentrate on thinking. Like Caesar and MacArthur, de Gaulle often referred to himself as a third person in his writings.For example, "the desire to appeal to de Gaulle is getting stronger and stronger", "to answer de Gaulle in the affirmative" and "how can General de Gaulle have no other choice" and so on.Once, a reporter asked him to explain the origin of the habit. He replied that although the occasional use of the third person was sometimes due to the style of writing, "the more important reason is that I found that there is a person named de Gaulle in other people's minds, and that de Gaulle is actually a person who has nothing to do with me." independent people." De Gaulle's greatest fear was that France would suffer from those countries that had made history and could now only commemorate it. He first realized the power of his public persona during a wartime visit to the city of Douala in French Equatorial Africa, where thousands lined the road and cheered: "Charles de Gaulle! Charles de Gaulle! Charles de Gaulle!" as he squeezed past As he walked through the crowd, he realized that General de Gaulle had become a living legend, a figure that dwarfed Charles de Gaulle, a figure larger than life.He later said: "From that day on, I knew I had to be compared with this man, this General de Gaulle, and I almost became his prisoner. Before I make a speech or make an important decision, I always have to ask myself Myself, would de Gaulle agree to this? Is this what the people expect de Gaulle to do? Does it fit de Gaulle and the role he played?" He went on thoughtfully: "There are many things I would like to do but can't Do it, because those things do not befit General de Gaulle." 无论是一个细微未节，还是一个重大姿态，总要肯定一下他是在扮演戴高乐将军的角色。到晚年，白内障严重地损害了他的视力。如果不戴上厚镜片的眼镜，有时连和他握手的人是谁都认不清。乔治·蓬皮杜告诉我，有一次他和戴高乐一同乘车穿过欢迎群众行列时发生的事：这位法国总统侧身问他的总理，在群众中是否有人向他挥手致意。夹道欢迎的人有那么多，但他竟看不见他们。戴高乐将军的形象又不允许他在公开场合戴上眼镜。由于他的虚荣心和非凡的背诵讲稿的能力，他从来不用讲词提词器。 象麦克阿瑟一样，戴高乐不为个人的危险担忧，他敏锐地知道这种勇气所能带来的巨大效果。皮埃尔·德马雷和克里斯琴。普卢姆在他们的《瞄准戴高乐》这本书中，描写过三十一次企图谋杀这位法国总统的事件。1962年，当他乘车经过巴黎一个郊区时，一道密集的机枪火网向他的汽车猛扫过来，一颗子弹从离他头部仅两英寸处飞过，当他在机场走下汽车时，他掸掉身上的玻璃碎片后说："我真幸运。这次很险，但是这些先生们的射击技术太蹩脚了。" 戴高乐老练地安排了在各种公开场合的露面。他的一年两次与新闻界的会见更象是在召见他们。会见是在爱丽舍宫的节日厅里举行的，大厅里金壁辉煌的天花板上垂挂着枝形的水晶灯盏。仅仅这些就够得上一次盛会，它吸引着上千名新闻记者。 在六十年代中期我对巴黎的一次访问中，我在波伦大使办公室里的电视机上看过戴高乐的一次记者招待会的实况。在接到提示之后，两个打着白领带、穿着燕尾服的男子拉开了舞台后的红丝绒帷幕，每个人都站立着，等待戴高乐的入场。他站在麦克风后面，他的部长们站在他的两旁。他示意大家坐下，只按他选好的一个题目讲了二十分钟，然后又只回答了三个问题，会见就结束了。 我们获悉，他为这次会见所作的讲话一直到那三个问题，事先都写好了讲稿，而这些问题是他的新闻官员们事先在某些记者中布置好了的，他事先记住了这些问题的答案，但是，因为我们知道这一切是布置好的，这似乎有一种催眠作用。在戴高乐结束会见后，经常用藐视口吻谈论这位法国总统的波伦只是摇头惊呼："多么令人吃惊的表演！" 他对其他公开集会也同样重视。1969年，戴高乐在为我们来访的代表团而举行的国宴上，发表了一个似乎是即席的流畅的祝酒词，因为他面前没有讲稿。事后，我的一位助手称赞戴高乐发表长篇讲话时始终未用讲稿的才能。戴高乐回答说："写下了讲稿，把它记在脑子里，然后把纸扔了。邱吉尔经常这样做，但他不肯承认。" 戴高乐虽然是一位善于做作的能手，但是他在同我历次的会见中从来没有运用过这种才能。我从未见过他提高嗓门说话。他从来没有企图用吓唬，或者虚张声势的办法使别人接受他的意见。如果他不同意某种意见的话，他会把它抛开，而不是假装同意。当他对某件事深有感触时，常常作出几分强调而又优雅的手势。他的思维质朴而又明快。这一点反映在他的公开的和私下的谈话之中。他从不草率地谈论和思考问题。他下的结论不一定正确，但他有罕见的从头到尾思考问题的才能，最后用令人非信服不可的、有说服力的逻辑来表达他的观点。 新闻报道上经常出现一些头发整齐而油光脸滑的政治家，在这样一个时代，值得人们回忆戴高乐是其中第一个达到顶峰的人物。夏尔·戴高乐在无线电广播中创造了戴高乐将军的形象。许多领导人已擅长使用电子新闻工具，但戴高乐的出色成就却堪称先驱，在他号召法国人民奔赴他的事业时，无线电波是他利用的唯一的讲台。正是通过在伦敦发出的无线电广播，戴高乐在第二次世界大战的黑暗年月里，成了法国传奇式的人物。 他在五十年代后期重新掌权时，电视正成为杰出的宣传工具。戴高乐登场了。他认识到电视可能给人带来眼花缭乱的效果，正如他后来听说的："突然间，出现了一种前所未有的，使你能在任何地方出现的工具。"他知道为了在电视中取得成功，必须改变自己的风格。他本来总是照着讲稿宣读广播讲话的。"但是，现在的电视观众在广播里听到戴高乐的声音的同时，还可以从屏幕上看到他，为了忠实于我的形象，就要象面对面谈话那样，不用讲稿，不戴眼镜……"他写道。这个七十多岁的老人，在无情的灯光下，孤零零地一人坐在桌子后面，表情必须使人觉得生动而自然，不用借助有损自己形象的过多手势和不切场合的怪相来吸引观众的注意。 他讲演的口才是出色的。他的低沉而爽朗的声音和他安详自若的风度结合在一起，使他给人一个鲜明的父亲般的形象。 他操法语就象邱吉尔操英语那样，华贵而豪放。这是一种古典的、近乎古代的法语。他口齿清晰准确，余音回荡，我想甚至没有学过这种语言的人也会理解他的意义。 在一次戏剧才华大放异彩的场合——在阿尔及利亚的殖民者和将军们向他的权威挑战时，他身穿将军服，在电视屏幕上向全国广播。许多美国评论家嘲笑这种举止，并称之为老掉牙的戏文。他们不可能理解穿着将军服的戴高乐能拨动所有法国人心底深处感情的琴弦，并把他们团结在一起——这种团结只有在最困难时刻盼望好日子来临时才存在。 但夏尔·戴高乐并不是光靠象征、口才或演技来创造戴高乐将军的。还靠他在公众中露面的全部场面——依靠情节、背景、精湛的表演技巧、常常由他自己编造的巧妙的双关语的准确性等等，去争取各种观点完全不同的人群的支持，因为他的讲话对兴趣不同的人可以有不同的理解。戴高乐将军是一个门面、但不是假门面。它的后面是一个有热情、智慧和训练有素的人。这个门面象是一座大教堂前的雕塑，而不是好莱坞的那种背后空无一物的骗人道具。 神秘可以诱惑人但是不能吸引人。为此，领袖人物需要的是戴高乐称之为性格的东西。大多数人把品质看成是道德的力量和坚韧性，但是戴高乐给领导的品质下的定义是强烈的愿望和发挥自己意志的内在力量。他说："把一个人放在他同辈之上，只有在他能够用他来自性格的、给共同的任务以推动力和完成任务的把握时，才可说得上合理。" 戴高乐在文章里说，在面临事物的挑战时，具有性格的领袖就躬身自问，只依靠自己。具备这种"追求独立自主"精神的领袖，"在困难中可以找到特殊的乐趣"，因为只有在和困难搏斗的时候，他才能检验并扩大这种精神的极限。他在作出决定时毫不畏缩，而是采取主动，大胆地去迎接这种时刻。 他写道，有性格的领袖能使集体的努力秩序井然。"统洽集团中自命不凡的笨蛋们"——脑海中一直想着如何保住他们的等级地位和职务的军人们和部长们，永远不能博得别人的信任和热情。因为"他们是寄生虫"，他们夺取一切，而什么也不给别人；他们是群软骨头家伙，两腿永远发抖，他们是些跳娃娃，只要一有机会，就会毫无顾忌地背叛变节。 他又写道，只有在那些用行动证明自己品德的、勇于正视并克服困难的和"不借一切牺牲的"领袖们才能赢得群众。他还说："有这种性格的人辐射出一种磁力。对追随他们的人来说，他们是取得最后胜利的象征和希望的化身。" 具有性格的人，首先不是博取他上级的欢心，而是极力忠于自己的职守。他那带刺的个性和不讲情面的行动，使他得不到那些不懂得应该使用有坚强意志的下属的上级的宠爱。他写道："国家最好的公仆，无论他们是军人还是政治家，极少是那些最温顺的人们。主人必须具有主人的智慧和勇气。最糟糕的政策是不任用性情梗直的人。理由呢，充其量只是他们难以相处罢了。和睦相处的关系，在事情顺利的情况下什么都好，但是到了危急时刻就要导致灾难。"这可能是在下意识地描绘他自己。 戴高乐经常劝告其他领导人要坚强，要依靠自己，最重要的是独立自主。戴高乐向对他怀有深切敬意的伊朗国王说："我对你只进一句忠言，然而却是很重要的一句：把你的全部力量投入维护独立自主上去。"1961年，他劝告肯尼迪总统采取一项一直在指导他的行动的原则："只听从你自己的！"1969年，我们乘车从机场进入巴黎市区时，他转身朝着我，把手放在我的手上，说："你看上去年轻、精力充沛、大权在握。这很重要，要保持下去。" 戴高乐的战时领导，体现了他关于性格的观点。第二次世界大战的艰巨任务摆在他面前时，他显示出了非凡的热忱。在这点上，戴高乐很象毛泽东。当面对重大考验时，这两个人似乎都承担起建立新生活的使命。但是，不同之处是，毛泽东打乱旧秩序以发动斗争，戴高乐是用斗争求得秩序。 当周思来和我驱车前往北京机场时，周恩来讲到毛泽东回到离别三十二年的故乡时写的一首诗。他说，这首诗说明了这样一个事实：逆境是良师。我同意这一点，并且指出，竞选失败的痛苦确实比在战争中负伤的痛苦还要大。后看只伤害了身体；前者却伤害了精神。但是，竞选失败有助于发展力量和增强性格，这对未来的战斗是必不可少的。我提到戴高乐不掌权时所度过的十二年有助于铸造他的性格时，周恩来表示同意，并补充说，在整个人生道路上一帆风顺的人都不会增长才干。 一个伟大的领袖只有逆流而上，而不是随波逐流时才能增长才干。 有些政治领导人从未遇到过逆境；有些从来克服过逆境。 只有少数人是逆境造就的，戴高乐就是这少数人中的一个。他对逆境并不陌生。在第一次世界大战中，他伤得如此严重，差一点死在战场上。结果被俘，被囚禁，一直到战争结束。第二次世界大战时，他在极其不利的条件下进行战斗，以挽回法国的荣誉。胜利后不久，他又被全国所抛弃。然而，十二年后他又重新执政。 当戴高乐从政界退隐后，他就"在野"了。大多数政治家一旦尝过权力的滋味，都舍不得丢弃它。美国有许多参议员在选举中被击败或者退休后不愿回到他们家乡所在的州去。他们宁愿呆在华盛顿，守在权力的边缘上。但是戴高乐从不忘怀家乡，总是口到家乡并从那里汲取力量。 科隆贝双城是戴高乐的避难所——在比喻上和实际上都是"原野"。科隆贝双城位于法国香巴尼地区朗日高原的边缘。 它离巴黎东南一百二十英里，人口三百五十人，在大部分交通图上找不到这个地名。戴高乐的房子——拉布瓦斯利——有十四间房间，是一座有褐色瓦顶和一端有个六角形塔的白石建筑物，在树木和灌丛的笼罩之中，遮断了过往行人的视线。戴高乐在这个小乡村庄园里同外界隔绝，为了增加他的神秘感，再也不可能找到更好的环境了。 在科隆贝，戴高乐发现如果在最高的职位上可能感觉孤独的话，那么在其他地方可能会更加孤独。但是这没有什么可悔恨的。他写道："在这纷繁的大千世界里，隐居原是我所向往的，现在则是我的伴侣。几经沧桑，还有什么比这更能令人满意的呢？" 尽管邱吉尔和戴高乐在战时作出了卓越的贡献，他们在第二次世界大战后都失去了领导权。然而，他们采取极不相同的方法试图重新掌握权力。法兰西人民联盟的失败对戴高乐的教训是：在政治活动中，两点之间最短的距离很少是直线。1955年，他在记者招待会上宣布退出政治生涯后，他选择了一种超然的、乡绅的生活，几乎没有作过任何努力要求公开露面。他是一位伟大的演员，象多数伟大演员一样，知道什么时候该退场。他也是一位政治大师。直觉告诉他，寻求高位一定得象向女人求爱那样。他遵循法国谚语的教导："你追她就逃，你退她就退。"象艾森豪威尔一样，他本能地知道，有时得到权力的最好的办法似乎是不要去求它。但是等待不是邱吉尔的性格。 邱吉尔继续在议会中领导忠诚于他的反对党，从来没有一个时刻不公开利用每一个可能的机会来夺回权力。两人都成功地夺回了权力，尽管使用的手段不同。 在美国政界中，我总是劝告那些渴望得到高位的人们：心里有雄心是一回事，而流露在外面的雄心抱负又是另一回事。 对于一个领袖人物，前看是必要而恰当的品质，后者是叫人远避和产生反感的品质。 戴高乐每星期一次离开简朴的外省住处——科隆贝，到他座落在巴黎索尔弗里诺街上的办公室和人们约谈。尽管第四共和国的人们反对戴高乐当领袖，却仍有许多热情的人来向他求教他的政治见解。但是他们离去时经常觉得，他从与他们的谈话中所得到的要多于他们。通过这些会见，戴高乐变成了法国对第四共和国活动方式和失败经过的最好的见证人。 他还与狂热地献身于他的拥护者保持接触。这些人在他失败时甚至比他在胜利时更效忠于他。他们是戴高乐极其重要的政治资本，形成了支持他的核心，使他能在时机来到之际抓住机会，重新掌权。当他掌权时，他们也给他以强大的、可靠的支持，这种支持在危机时刻，对于一位领袖是不可缺少的。 他的许多追随者中，更多的是被他本人所吸引，而不是他的思想。在政治上比戴高乐更左的安德烈·马尔罗是如此地被戴高乐的性格迷住，以至于成了一个近乎卑躬屈膝的支持者。 在我第一次访华前不久，在为马尔罗举行的一次白宫晚宴后，当我陪他走向他的汽车时，他用崇拜的口吻说到戴高乐："我不是戴高乐——没有人是戴高乐，"他说："但是如果戴高乐在这里，我知道他会说些什么，所有那些理解你正在从事什么的人向你致敬！"个人崇拜经常随着被崇拜的人去世而消逝。戴高乐主义并非如此，这是由于对戴高乐的怀念，戴高乐主义甚至现在在法国的政治生活中仍起着重要作用，即使其作用在减弱。戴高乐在科隆贝居住的年月里，他经常会见这些追随者，培育他们对他忠诚的情绪。 最重要的是，在他政治上被放逐时期，戴高乐变得更加聪明起来了。阿登纳告诉一位记者，在科隆贝的那些年月里，"对他好处极大，现在他成了西方最能干的政治家了"。伟大的领袖人物们总是从错误中比从成功中学到更多的东西。戴高乐在他的三卷《戴高乐回忆录》中重新检讨了自己的行为。在论述他的行动时，常常以检查当时可能采用的别的方案的价值，来重新估价他的行动。为了进行这样的重新评价和自我批评而必须具备的不偏不倚的立场，这种正确观察事物的能力，在政治领导人中是少见的。但对于一个试图东山再起的人来说，它又是绝对必要的。 戴高乐的一位同僚写道："写这本回忆录使他成为一个政治策略家"，在他1958年当上总理后不久，这一点变得更加显而易见了。他要求议会给他处理国家危机的特权。旧日的戴高乐本来会要求议会给他这些权力，并用辞职作威胁，而新戴高乐知道安抚的重要性。他这个政治技工深深懂得，如果给机器加油，它就会运转得更平稳。 当他来到议会时，他对议员们尽情打趣逗乐。在休息时，他亲切地和他们聊天，来争取政敌。他向他们保证说，他的所作所为全都是为着"使共和国更强大、更健壮、更有效和坚不可摧。"他恭维他们说："我想要你们都知道，今晚有机会和你们一起在这里聚会，我是感到多么荣幸和高兴。"听了他这番话之后，那些竭尽全力试图阻止他重新掌权的议员们都目瞪口呆。他们鼓掌喝采，同意给戴高乐想要的权力。 戴高乐也能透彻地分析美国的政治。在1960年访美期间，他对美国即将来临的总统选举表示了极大的兴趣。他小心翼翼地不表示出站在哪一边，但是他确实提出了一些英明的忠告。 他告诉我，他知道我作为副总统，将要并且也应该在艾森豪威尔政府的政绩基础上进行竞选，但是我要得到他认为时代要求我得到的位置是困难的。他非常强调地说："你必须用建设新的美国作纲领来竞选"当然，我不能这样做，因为那样的话，我就会象是批评现政府，而我本人也正是这个政府的一员。但是，忠告是正确的。肯尼迪就是以"新的美国"这个主题来竞选的，而结果他获胜了。