Page 7
Newsmakers of 1962
In 1962, world attention focused sharply on many individuals, among them President John F. Kennedy, President Charles de Gaulle, Prime Minister Nehru, Premier Fidel Castro, and Jean Monnet. The things they did, the roles they played, will continue to thrust them onto the world scene, and because of their likely impact upon history the Daily Kansan presents these articles.
Friday, Jan. 4, 1963 University Daily Kansam
Monnet's Dreams Rebuild W. Europe
By Zeke Wigglesworth
Things like persuading two former enemies to pool their resources for mutual benefit to them both when shortly before they had been slaughtering each other.
Small children dream of growing up and becoming somebody important-firemen or astronauts or cowboys or spies for the Central Intelligence Agency.
But Jean Monnet was different. All he ever wanted or dreamed about was "doing things."
Things like overseeing a combined British and French arms and supply system.
NOT LITTLE THINGS like designing bridges or ponderous monuments in steel and stone . . .
not little things like building super highway systems or huge industrial empires . . .
Big things. Jean Monnet wanted to do big things.
Things like taking Western Europe by the bootstraps and raising it to an economic level seen only by visionaries.
When World War I began, his father told him to join the French army. Jean Monnet had other ideas.
THINGS LIKE BEING the force and spirit behind the dream of a "United States of Europe."
He told it this way in a rare interview granted to CBS newsman David Schoenbrun:
"I WENT to Paris, asked a friend who knew the Prime Minister to get me an appointment. I remember his astonishment when I told the Prime Minister how to win the war. Very simple I thought it was. Put British and French resources to her completely. Simple as tha-
When Jean Monnet talked to the Prime Minister, he was in his early 20's. He was embarking on a career which would cause him to be involved in almost every major event in Western Europe until the present day.
Serving as the coordinator for the French-British supply and arms system during World War I brought him into contact with many people in high places. These were men who came to know and trust the young Frenchman, and who saw in him a rising thinker, a man who could work things out.
"I am not an economist," he says. "I never went to college. I was an indifferent student. I never studied economics and I'm not sure I understand it.
He was always busy and always on the go. He was doing things.
When the war ended, Monnet came to the United States and operated a stock brokerage. He also served as an official of the newly-formed League of Nations. And he was doing big things.
"I am not a financier . . . I am not a statesman . . . I am not a civil servant."
HE WENT TO China at the call of Chiang Kai-shek and completely reorganized the Chinese railway system.
When World War II began, and the Free French government was formed, President Charles de Gaulle made Monnet the coordinator between the Free French and the United States.
"Monnet handed De Gaulle a short memorandum for the reconstruction of France. He was told 'Get on with it.'
In an interview with Monnet, Kansas City Star correspondent Marcell Wellenstein said:
AND WHEN the war was over,
Monnet continued to do big things.
"He organized industrialists, politicians and laborers. Devastated towns were rebuilt . . . the French treasury, banking system and mines were modernized. While
politicians wrangled, Monnet was achieving an economic miracle in France."
When Western Europe began to climb out of the rubble, Jean Monnet was there.
HE WAS CHIEF administrator for the Schumann Plan, a revolutionary in its approach to rebuilding France and Germany. France had iron, Germany had coal. "Very simple, I thought it was," said Monnet, and he pooled the resources of the two former combatants to give them prosperity.
He has an office in Paris, down the street from the American Embassy and across the way from NATO headquarters. It is here that Jean Monnet plots the path of Western Europe.
Today, Jean Monnet is 72 years old — but he's still doing big things.
Every time a trade barrier is broken down or a supply of Belgian lace sells at the same price in six countries, Jean Monnet is there.
He is the president of the Action Committee for a United States of Europe, an organization dedicated to bringing the dream of a unified Europe down to earth.
WHEN YOU PICK up a history book to look for Jean Monnet's name, you won't find it. All you will find are the things he has done.
HE AND HIS advisers plan the "step by step, slowly" progress Europe is making toward unification — unification involving economics, politics and spirit.
And Jean Monnet has done some big things.
De Gaulle Declines Ignominy; Greatness for France His Goal
By Terry Murphy
TO COMPREHEND the driving forces which propel Charles de Gaule it is helpful to consider a paraphrase in his memoirs; "France cannot be France without greatness."
Charles de Gaulle is similar to the white whale, Moby Dick—he is all things to all men. He is hated and beloved, respected and disdained, a patriot and an egocentric; depending on the situation and the viewpoint, he represents good or bad, right or wrong.
Yet, his popularity as a leader
This detachment from the political front in France was instrumental in making him "the only man capable of saving France" after the 25th government since the end of World War II toterted down to collapse amidst riots in Algeria and Paris.
During World War II he was the symbol of France's national resistance. When he was the head of government from 1944 to 1946, he instituted forward-looking policies; democratic institutions were restored, the African colonies were started toward emancipation, all Algerians were given the right to vote, and the Communist party was persuaded to cooperate in programs of national reconstruction.
Amidst chaos, he moved in and literally self-constructed a powerful central government which has been purposeful and influential.
BUT DE GAULLE also pushed the fruitless and wasteful war in Indo-China that ended in pathetic ashes at Dien-Bien-Phu. The war was a needless strain on an already struggling economy, and had it been won, offered no prize worth the effort.
From 1946 until 1958, he retired to the village of Colombey, where he wrote his heralded memoirs. During this 12-year period, De Gaulle retained his popularity but he exerted little influence and avoided choosing sides.
cannot be explained by his personal appeal to the common man. He is aloof; he disdains the affection of the masses and feels the common man is incapable of understanding him.
Even when the continuance of his regime was at stake in the recent popular-election-of-the-president referendum, he refused to administer the "personal" touch that has come to be the hallmark of other strong leaders. "Take it, or leave it, I care not a whit" seems to sum up his view. His brand of politics and leadership is so distinctive that it has been given a separate name: "gaulism."
Despite the fact that he is president of a country that has been threatened with internal revolt in the face of a decaying string of colonies, De Gaulle refuses to assume the secondary role that his country's relative power would seem to dictate; especially in the chambers of international politics.
But De Gaulle is aware of the apparent irrationality of placing France's role in world politics at so high a level. Realizing that France's ascendance as a wedge of influence cannot be operable solely on the basis of historical grandeur, he is moving to qualify France for a position among the Powerful.
"WESTERN EUROPE is essential to the West. Nothing can replace the value, the power, the shining examples of these ancient peoples. This is true of France above all ... it is in the political realm that she must recover her vigor, her self-reliance and consequently her role." This excerpt from his two-volume memoirs places him in a light of being a man firmly entrenched in the dreams of the past.
The new entrance fee into the Power Elite is the possession of nuclear warheaded ballistic missiles. And De Gaulle means to have them.
This assumption of the tiger's role by an apparent mouse is deceiving. De Gaulle is no fool. He
has been quick to grasp the truth that if France is to be powerful and influential, it must be as a part of a powerful and influential Western Europe. The heart of Western Europe might is the Common Market. The French leader has worked as hard as any man to make it the success that it is today.
WHILE HE IS a realist, De Gaulle is not considered a practical man—especially in the opinion of other members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. When he assumed power Dec. 31, 1958, NATO leaders feared that the then-67-year-old soldier would be a disruptive influence to a policy of containment.
Vocally, he has been disruptive, As Khrushchev began to espouse the possibility of peaceful coexistence, De Gaulle began prophesying that it would prove a mirage. De Gaulle said peaceful coexistence would amount to nothing but satisfying the voracious appetite of communism by feeding it bits and pieces of territory until nothing remained.
Regardless of whether it be standing toe-to-toe with Khrushchev or his handling of the Aigerian problem, De Gaulle refuses to bow to pressure or to ride the popular tide. Enemy and foe alike continue to predict that by assassination or election De Gaulle will meet his Waterloo. If he fails, he has illustrated that it will be while playing the game, whatever it may be, according to his rules.
He rose to power during and after World War II despite the fact that Roosevelt and Churchill considered him to be an egocentric who did not represent France so much as himself. And he assumed power again in 1958 at the age of 67. Few believed he would be able to achieve all that he has.
But they failed to consider the man: the odds means nothing to Charles de Gaulle. He refuses to consider that he might be wrong or that he could fail.
Nehru Power Bridles a Troubled Giant
Bv Janice Pauls
When Jawaharlal Nehru assumed the position as prime minister of India in 1947, few historians were willing to predict a prolonged tenure for the new leader.
Nehru stepped into the Indian spotlight at a time when the glittering reality of freedom was still new, thus inheriting a large inventory of actual and potential chaos. His task of replacing the beloved Gandhi, in both the hearts and minds of the people, also added considerably to the new Prime Minister's burdens.
TODAY, IN 1963, as Nehru directs the people of India through the existing unrest with Red China, the same historians would have to admit that the reign of this philosopher-statesman has been successful. Fortunately, Nehru now occupies the same sentimental spot in the hearts of his people that was reserved only for Gandhi before India freed herself from Great Britain.
Nehru has not found his task an easy one. He faced not only the separation of his country into India and Pakistan, which created 12 million refugees, but also sectarian troubles in which the dominant religion erected a barrier to consolidation. As the new Prime Minister began his duty of building a better life for his people, he discovered that the hundreds of subcastes, each with a different religious requirement, impeded essential action toward political unity on dozens of fronts.
Provincialism and separation threatened to destroy the country's unity not long after independence was achieved. For this
Nehru has been criticised, as many Indian people feel he has not been firm enough in his dealings with separatist pressures. Although he constantly rebukes separatist tendencies, it is felt that Nehru's failure to block the linguistic and cultural autonomy
Jawaharlal Nehru
drives of Bombay and Andhra, states which succeeded in winning separate status, has encouraged other elements to seek sovereignty.
LIKE MANY ASIAN leaders, Nehru has had to face the problem of over-population. Despite a mammoth housing program, substantial improvement in the food supply, and a far-reaching program of mass birth control, India's increasing population has continued to threaten the nation's security and welfare.
Although the people hold a deep respect and affection for Nehru, they still complain that economic growth under his leadership has not been rapid enough. Their grievances stem mostly from impatience created by great expectations, for their progress is clearly visible.
Under Nehru's leadership, progress has been such that people are walking with shoes on their feet for the first time in their lives. Those who previously walked long distances are now riding bicycles and those who had bicycles now own cars.
NEHRU HAS NOT remained in power through a dictatorship or political machine but because of his personal contact with the soul of India. His contact with his subjects consists of a direct exchange with them. He never speaks from a text because this, he feels, interferes with his desire to get inside their minds. One of the elements of Nehru's success as a leader has been his interaction through give-and-take with the people who admire and respect him.
"The immediate problems you meet on a day-to-day basis are a source of headaches and you
Prime Minister Nehru, a leader who hopes that his legacy to India will be 400 million people capable of governing themselves, has best summed up his 15 years of leadership in India:
tend to think things are going poorly. However, if you see matters in historical perspective, you may feel that there has been some progress, after all."
A PRIME MINISTER who at the beginning of his term was voted least likely to succeed has today developed into a political leader who is respected and admired not only in his own country but also throughout the world.
The amount of recognition which will be granted Nehru for his accomplishments can only one determined a half-century from now. India and the world will find it difficult to ignore, however, that this great leader's proposed legacy to his country is one unmatched by any other.
However, just as the common people of India today are complaining that their economic progress has been too slow, so are the people 50 years from now likely to forget what Nehru has done for them. Although the Prime Minister's intention is to leave the country in a state of educated independence, a legacy more important than vast riches, he may be criticized someday for not being more imperialistic-minded or for not increasing the economic wealth of the country more than he has.
Nehru will definitely be remembered by his people but probably not to the extent that Gandhi has been. While Gandhi was almost a God to the people of India, Nehru has been more human in his attempts to aid the nation. For this, as is often true of human efforts, he will be criticized and later forgotten in lieu of someone who is able to do more for the constituents.